Did Hillary Cry Her Way to Victory?
A Democrat presidential candidate is the front-runner for a year, and then becomes emotional in New Hampshire — with some press accounts reporting tears.
It happened in 1972 — and it ended Ed Muskie’s campaign.
But that was then, and this is now:
Terry McAuliffe, a longtime friend of the Clinton family and her campaign chair, was talking to reporters when the news [of Hillary Clinton’s victory in New Hampshire] flashed.
. . . .
Asked if he believed Clinton helped her cause by tearing up on Monday while meeting with undecided voters at a Portsmouth cafe, McAuliffe said: “Sure I do. People saw how passionate she is about the issues.”
Earlier this evening I asked: “Did Hillary cry her way to victory?”
What else erased Obama’s huge lead so quickly? You tell me.
UPDATE: When Maureen Dowd and I are saying the same thing, someone needs to be worried.
Great ground game vs. Obama’s student voters not being organized and disciplined enough to get off their asses?
I.e., young being being lazy?
Christoph (92b8f7) — 1/8/2008 @ 9:48 pmObama had a good organization in Iowa but a bad one in New Hampshire?
Patterico (4bda0b) — 1/8/2008 @ 9:50 pmPatterico, my knowledge of Iowa women comes mostly from chatting with them on the internet, however… I will say they are very soft compared to other American women. A bit gullible as per the stereotype. And so idealistic. Emotion based.
I think they go for Obama for the same reasons they go for Huckabee… maybe the more level-headedness of New Hampshire — McCain and Romney over Huckabee, Clinton over the younger less-experienced Obama — played much more of a factor than I would have guessed.
If I’d flirted with more New Hampshire girls, perhaps I could have given you a better political analysis sooner.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 1/8/2008 @ 9:55 pmProspective voters finally convincing pollsters that bankruptcy is a real possibility. Being a suggestion that maybe they should STFU until the votes are counted?
As to winners and losers in NH, it’s those taking polls that are the undisputed losers!
“…how passionate she is about the issues.”
That is a total crock of bial at best and actually a bit further in the digestive tract in reality.
This woman, Hillary, would slit your throat for a vote!
TC (1cf350) — 1/8/2008 @ 10:12 pmTC – I think you were on the right track with polls, but the publicity about Obama’s lead may have worked against him on the margin. Even though the turnout was large, how many people may have decided to stay at home because of Obama’s projected victory margin – if he’s going to win by that much he doesn’t need my vote – or thrown their vote to McCain since it was an open primary.
daleyrocks (906622) — 1/8/2008 @ 10:17 pmPatterico, gotta read this. Apparently local polling showed it was pretty much a draw going in, with Clinton ahead in two polls.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 1/8/2008 @ 10:25 pmEven the national polling only flipped in the last day or three. All post-Iowa.
Pablo (99243e) — 1/8/2008 @ 10:32 pmPolls are wrong. This primary is interesting because the big shows were Clinton vs. Obama and Romney vs. McCain. Many independents had the real choice of Obama or McCain. The more who went to McCain, the fewer votes Hillary (with high negatives) needed to win her own battle. Add to that the excitement surrounding Huckabee just days before in Iowa. Much of the polling is done with robots calling people at home on the weekend. “How would you feel if I voted for a turtle turned upside down in the desert?!” It’s a mess!
Wesson (d8d88d) — 1/8/2008 @ 10:58 pmNew England Yankees are, above all, a practical folk. I know, I grew up there.
This came down to one thing – electability. The folks (tm Bill O’Reilly) recognized that there is no way in heck a black-appearing dude with a Muslim heritage was gonna win the presidency this cycle. That, coupled with the advantage of good old machine politics (check out the turnout in Manchester), stunted Obama’s seeming momentum.
Hillary’s word choice of “spadework” in describing the experience gap was no accident, my friend.
By the way, anti-Mormonism played a similar role in McCain’s victory. The voters would never acknowledge it, though. Recall that Iowa voters cited Huckabee’s tax policy as dispositive in deciding their votes.
Yeah, right.
One note, and I’d dearly love for you to follow up on this…The original Fox exit poll had it 39 Hil, and 35 Obama. They hemmed and hawed and said they would “refine” it and “weight” it and come back later with a “final” result. Sure as shooting, it ended up 39 Hil and 37 Obama and they STILL refused to call it until after AP did.
Question – why were they so utterly irresponsible in presenting an incomplete exit poll result? This was not Michael Barone’s finest hour. In fact, it was his worst. Unless, it turns out, he didn’t take part in assigning the values cited. Could you look into this?
Ed (b24a6d) — 1/8/2008 @ 11:02 pmEDIT
Fox’s first exit poll had it obama 39 hil 35. two hours later, they switched it to hil 39 obama 37.
Sorry for my failure to communicate. Please don’t sic Strother on me! 🙂
Ed (b24a6d) — 1/9/2008 @ 12:44 amPatterico, Michelle Malkin has a different take: Hillary and the Access Hollywood Factor.
Paul (dbbea6) — 1/9/2008 @ 3:32 am“What else erased Obama’s huge lead so quickly? You tell me.”
Did obama really have a lead? something small like new hampshire is going to be hard to poll. And even then, predicting likely voters is going to be harder still. Iowa had turnout surprises. NH allowed independents to choose which primary to vote in. When every election is a “surprise,” maybe the answer is that our prediction system is wrong, not that the people are changing their minds.
People are trusting these numbers, and these small elections too much.
Oh, and I saw the video. That wasn’t crying.
stef (034065) — 1/9/2008 @ 5:39 amObama attracks the young, his problem is that there are more old people in America than young.
Hillary will win the nomination, there are too many life-long career Democrats who are heavily invested in Clinton, Inc.
Hillary will win the White House, there are too many entitlement boomers who are expecting America to provide for their every desire and need.
The American mindset is pre-1993 WTC bombing; Americans want the Federal government to maintain their Happy fix.
Hope Americans are prepared for the high Misery Index we’ll all be under.
Real Change will come after the third attack.
syn (9c2583) — 1/9/2008 @ 5:46 amNo, she didn’t cry her way to victory. People bitch and moan that she is the ice queen and lacks femininity. When her eyes tear up for a moment, she is bashed for being too emotional. She won because the polls were wrong and she had done a lot of ground work in NH.
tired (b7e74a) — 1/9/2008 @ 5:47 amThough I agree, it doesn’t explain why that moron Carter won.
tired (b7e74a) — 1/9/2008 @ 5:48 amOh I just KNEW this topic heading was coming! I shouild have predicted it last nigth before turning in.
Well I’ll tell you. The polls were wrong. In fact I’d go so far as to say the polls are almost always wrong. Obviously the enormous numbers of women wo voted for Hillary weren’t polled. And obviously the enormous numbers of young pople who showed up the cheer the Magic Negro didn’t bother to vote.
David Ehrenstein (da3648) — 1/9/2008 @ 5:49 amAs for The Polls, isn’t time we all recognize media-generated polls are meaningless?
Question for the Democrats supporting Obama, you really didn’t think MSM would support his candidacy, did you?
Obama supporters are going to learn what it was like dealing with the MSM control over the masses while Bush was in office. It may have seemed great at the time because you hated Bush and that’s all that matter to you but now’s your turn.
Have fun while MSM works to insure Obama loses.
syn (9c2583) — 1/9/2008 @ 5:54 amCarter was twenty-five years ago, all his supporters are now the entitlement boomers going for Clinton; the ‘peace, love and understanding, we want our Happy fix’ crowd.
America was a younger society under the Carter adminstration.
syn (9c2583) — 1/9/2008 @ 5:57 amLet’s not get carried away, here. There are not enormous numbers of people in N,H let alone enormous numbers of voters.
tired (b7e74a) — 1/9/2008 @ 6:20 amMaybe Hillary’s crying helped, but I think voters are realizing that Obama is a really weak candidate.
Perfect Sense (b6ec8c) — 1/9/2008 @ 6:35 amTrue. But that’s not the impression the meat puppets had created. It was, needless to say, a mirage.
David Ehrenstein (da3648) — 1/9/2008 @ 6:49 amNH has the same number of delegates as Wyoming, yet you hear nothing of Wyomings selections. Perhaps all y’all need to stop kowtowing to the Media.
PCD (5c49b0) — 1/9/2008 @ 7:10 amMarkos gets it.
David Ehrenstein (da3648) — 1/9/2008 @ 8:05 amThanks for linking your Op-Ed piece David. Well written, well reasoned and prescient. It explains the crying white audience phenomenon better than anything else I have read.
rhodeymark (e86321) — 1/9/2008 @ 10:51 amYou’re welcome!
David Ehrenstein (da3648) — 1/9/2008 @ 11:01 amDavid, when you’re good, you’re good. I do thnk there is another factor that is rarely mentioned, except here. The Iowa caucuses are NOT SECRET BALLOTS. The white Democrats could display their virtue in public. In New Hampshire, since there was a secret ballot, the polls showed what the voters wanted the pollsters to see; benevolent white Democrats voting for the black man. Inside the votng booth, nobody was looking. That’s not necessarily to say they are racist. They are racist in the Democrat way; it’s all about looking virtuous.
Mike K (6d4fc3) — 1/9/2008 @ 12:05 pmPossibly. But even if that factor wasn’t in potential play Iowa and New Hampshire are very different places with very different voters.
David Ehrenstein (da3648) — 1/9/2008 @ 12:25 pmSpeaking of racists Democrats, anyone here remember when Democrats ‘black-faced’ a Jew because he wasn’t Liberal enough?
syn (9c2583) — 1/9/2008 @ 2:52 pmAlmost all polls are based on ridiculously small sample sizes. There’s more than a small bit of quackery about the polling business when it claims that it can accurately measure the decisions of a few hundred thousand based on questioning perhaps one percent of that number.
That said, in NH, it’s not the case that the polls overestimated Obama’s support–they hit it fairly on the head, in terms of margin of error. What happened is that the polls underestimated the support Hillary had and overestimated the support others candidates had. People who the polls expected to vote for the lesser candidates seem to have often voted for Hillary instead.
I suppose the crying moment may have helped Hillary, in allowing people to see that while she is a total bitch, she is a total bitch who has feelings. And no doubt, a few people were tired of being told by the MSM that Obama was the winner already, and decided to cock a little snoot.
kishnevi (ab2b28) — 1/9/2008 @ 4:20 pm(But there are parts of the MSM who rabidly hate Hillary. Chris Matthews the other night was a fountain of bile spewing at high pressure when he wandered into the topic of the Clinton machine.)
Can’t find that on “Google,” dear.
David Ehrenstein (da3648) — 1/9/2008 @ 4:20 pmAnyone who bought her tears needs to be neutered and put in a nice place with bunnies and flowers and where the rest of us don’t have to deal with such mind-bending stupidity.
funny now how some dems are complaining that NH voting was rigged, and it must be the GOP’s fault, because this situation reminds them of FL ’00.
But of course liberals are so moronic that they fail to notice that the rest of us might notice that the one thing FL and NH have in common is that Democrats are involved, and also Democrat-controlled voting apparatus.
martin (99bf70) — 1/9/2008 @ 4:49 pmI found her tearing up repulsive, and I’m her target voter. I think there were a lot of new voters and a lot of independents; the polling doesn’t fit any more. And the NH folks enjoy sticking it to the pundits as well, IMO.
Patricia (f56a97) — 1/9/2008 @ 4:56 pmYeah she was repulsive. Let’s kill her. KILL THE WITCH!!!!
David Ehrenstein (da3648) — 1/9/2008 @ 5:11 pmThe attention hound sadly will have to accomplish his suggested task all by his lonesome, as the rest of us are too busy, uh, commenting on the topic of this thread. LOL
And no doubt, a few people were tired of being told by the MSM that Obama was the winner already, and decided to cock a little snoot.
And the NH folks enjoy sticking it to the pundits as well, IMO.
That does make sense. Also, IMO the crying helped, but other factors (several) were also in play, like the abortion factor. Committed “Pro-Choice” voters know the Clintons are totally committed to legal abortion, but may not be aware of Obama’s views (totally proabortion too, but not as famously).
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/9/2008 @ 5:27 pmIf CNN could stop long enough to stop the Hillary for President celebrations and do some real reporting, I’d like to know whether any investigative journalists have looked into the discrepancy between the hand count and the machine count and if not, why not:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7753
sb10 (32bf82) — 1/9/2008 @ 5:39 pmDE
It perfectly reasonable for someone to have found Hillary’s crying to be repulsive without leaping to “kill the witch”.
SteveG (4e16fc) — 1/9/2008 @ 5:56 pmSeems like a bit of a disconnect to me… for instance, I may think a certain poster who claims to be male, black and gay often overindulges in race and sexual orientation based histrionics to the point where I feel repulsed but I have never found myself hissing “kill him” like the wicked witch
By the way, repulsive is a perfectly good word and when I did a virus and malware scan on Patricia’s post I’m pleased to announce that I found no hidden embedded racist homophopic code.
SteveG (4e16fc) — 1/9/2008 @ 6:10 pmIt is perfectly OK to be repulsed by the actions a female democrat with an honorary black husband
sb10, the article you linked doesn’t mention any such discrepancy. What it says is there is a discrepancy between pre-election polls and the vote tally. But not all the pre-election polls put Obama ahead.
Eric (09e4ab) — 1/9/2008 @ 6:28 pmMy last word on the matter.
Caution: May Be Too Intense For Some Readers.
David Ehrenstein (da3648) — 1/9/2008 @ 6:35 pmIt’s hard to believe people have a problem with people showing controlled emotion. She wants to help our country! is there a problem with that! Many men in politics have cried in public, even sobbed! George Bush Senior being one of them. Men need to realize that crying isn’t a sign of weakness. If anything, a man or woman that doesn’t show emotion is a person with no conscience and scary if you ask me. I’m not saying all displays of emotions are normal-(Jerry Springer People for example)but when it comes from the heart, there’s nothing wrong with it!
Kate (58e069) — 1/9/2008 @ 6:35 pmI can’t believe that men and even some women are questioning a woman being President. Women have been powerful leaders in history and don’t forget everyone has a mother, so show some respect!! A man’s running our country now and look at the mess we’re in!!!! Go Hillary!!!!
Thank you, SteveG. I was just going to say, take a chill pill, David.
Just don’t play my post backwards…
Patricia (f56a97) — 1/9/2008 @ 6:50 pmRegarding Entry #39.
“Intense” may not be quite the correct term. But anything to try to attract traffic, I guess.
Lurker (7e375e) — 1/9/2008 @ 7:09 pmkate, I guess its hard to believe – but paying no attention to what people are actually saying, and taking Hillary’s “poor me” schtick on how everyone treats her unfairly – well, I guess insulating yourself from what is really people’s problem with Hillary makes it easier for you to delude yourself.
You should make a video demanding that everyone leave Hillary alone and post it on YouTube.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/9/2008 @ 7:25 pmThat’s a great idea!!!! Thanks
Kate (58e069) — 1/10/2008 @ 1:45 pmAs they say,
If at first you Don’t Succeed (Cry, Cry Again)
Bruce (1cf32b) — 1/11/2008 @ 8:07 amDr BLT copyright 2008
http://www.drblt.net/music/CryAgainDemo2.mp3
Good point, David, except that it’s wrong. Obama was polling at an average of 38.3%, and his end result was 36%, within the margin of error.
The polls flubbed on Hillary’s support. Obama’s they got just about right.
Pablo (99243e) — 1/11/2008 @ 8:23 amPablo is right.
My theory of the crime:
HILLARY’S ‘CRY’ AND CLINTON VOTE FRAUD: NH POLLS WERE RIGHT
by Mia T, 1.11.08
video: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpk5GaAAutQ]
Pollsters, pundits and media types listen up! The mawkish hand-wringing and self-incrimination can stop. You were not wrong. Your New Hampshire poll numbers were, in fact, correct.
Let me explain….
Your polls predicted Clinton 30%, Obama 38%, Edwards 18%.
The actual results were Clinton 39%, Obama 36%, Edwards 17%.
The only apparent error is in hillary clinton’s numbers.
But if we adjust for standard-issue clinton hanky-panky, hillary’s numbers are correct, too.
What happened….
When deconstructing clinton moves, Machiavelli will always make more sense than Ockham. Consider this scenario:
The reverse mo from the Iowa loss was quickly transforming New Hampshire, hillary’s putative firewall, into her Last Stand. Clinton internal polls confirmed what was in the field: A humiliating defeat ahead in The Granite State, perhaps double-digit, for the quondam shoo-in. Worse, the end of The Reign of Clinton. (Make that ‘Better’ if you are not a clinton: You could have cut the pre-primary Schadenfreude on both sides of the aisle with a knife.)
What to do? (Need you ask?)
By the weekend before the New Hampshire primary, the clintons had all the vote fraud in place–ballots to be stuffed, out-of-staters-for-hillary queued up and ready to go. (Locals would later report an unusually large number of vehicles with Massachusetts plates on election day.)
What the clintons needed now was a rationale for what would be a results-altering discrepancy in hillary’s numbers.
Hence the ‘cry.’
But the stage had to be set. Non-humans don’t cry. And neither do commanders in chief, (although for missus clinton, perceived weakness is secondary to short-term gain: She has played the victim card for votes and power throughout her life and repeatedly during this campaign.)
And so we had the “Access Hollywood” prequel.
And for good measure, a sexist old saw tailored precisely to foment the pre-Friedan female: The post-‘cry’ cry, ‘Iron my shirt!’
Mia T (380f47) — 1/12/2008 @ 11:42 pm