Patterico’s Pontifications

1/8/2008

NBC Calls New Hampshire for Hillary; UPDATE: So Does Fox News

Filed under: 2008 Election — Patterico @ 7:46 pm

Story here.

UPDATE: So. Did Hillary cry her way to victory?

UPDATE x2: More on this question here.

25 Comments

  1. Obama concedes. Graciously.

    Comment by Christoph — 1/8/2008 @ 7:57 pm

  2. Wow, Obama’s giving a magnificent speech and sounds so much like Martin Luther King.

    You may not remember his speaches; heck, I don’t. My dad told me how moving they were.

    But I’ve heard them.

    And that’s what Obama sounds like… this is his concession speech for this part of the candidate selection process. He may not win now… but one day, he’ll be powerful if he continues this.

    Comment by Christoph — 1/8/2008 @ 8:01 pm

  3. Obama concedes. Graciously.

    Much as I disagree with his views on issues, the man has a lot of class.

    Comment by no one you know — 1/8/2008 @ 8:03 pm

  4. There’s only one way to determine a Democratic candidacy for the Presidency now: Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Two swords. One arena. There can be only one.

    Comment by chaos — 1/8/2008 @ 8:06 pm

  5. Obama had a double-digit lead coming into today. As much as we rightly distrust polls, they are *rarely* that far off, particularly WMUR’s in Manchester.

    Either Hillary won because she cried, because New Hampshire developed some incomprehensible racist streak - or the Party establishment called in every favor they’ve banked since FDR to bury the upstart from Illinois.

    Comment by steve — 1/8/2008 @ 8:07 pm

  6. Clinton just started speaking and she looks emotional. Genuinely this time, I believe.

    Comment by Christoph — 1/8/2008 @ 8:08 pm

  7. From now on, Hillary’s main chance at the nomination rests solely on how long John Edwards stays in. If he gets out now, most of his voters go to Obama and Hillary is out. He stays in as long as he claims he wants to … and Hillary owes him for spliting the anti-Hillary vote.

    Comment by SPQR — 1/8/2008 @ 8:13 pm

  8. Clinton’s best speech ever. Not a fan of her, but it was good.

    Comment by Christoph — 1/8/2008 @ 8:19 pm

  9. So. Did Hillary cry her way to victory?

    I’d check the voting machines.

    Comment by J. Peden — 1/8/2008 @ 8:46 pm

  10. I agree it was her best speech. Less glacial than usual. Maybe she has truly found her voice. McCain’s speech was truly great, IMO.

    Obama sounded good but said nothing I agreed with. In fact I vehemently disagreed with most of his talking points, but it’s interesting he made them at all. I guess he needs to attract people to his campaign. His run on vague charm is over.

    Comment by Patricia — 1/8/2008 @ 9:29 pm

  11. Seems NH voters got it right.

    When the pollsters call, send em off into the swamp!

    Comment by TC — 1/8/2008 @ 9:42 pm

  12. Beldar’s and Patterico’s dream dies.

    Hugh Hewitt’s never does.

    Comment by Christoph — 1/8/2008 @ 10:08 pm

  13. Beldar’s and Patterico’s dream dies.

    Comment by Christoph — 1/8/2008 @ 10:11 pm

  14. Hugh Hewitt’s never does.

    Comment by Christoph — 1/8/2008 @ 10:11 pm

  15. 1. The pollsters were wrong—AGAIN.
    2. They ignored the “little old lady” crowd, the entitlement rich portion (”free” medical care and free drugs) of the electorate.
    3. They never factored in abortion, the only issue for feminists, old and young.
    4. There were two polls that showed a dead heat, but they were tiny with a sampling in the teens.

    But there is a real class problem for Obama which surfaced big time. His support is mainly among the latte’ sniffing Starbucks dwellers; those in the upper income group who read arcane mags, the Sanskrit version of the NYT, and watch PBS telecasts in Spanish. She carried all the lower classes, especially the high school drop outs and so on. He carried the liberal elites, a potentially huge problem for him.

    Now it’s on to the Black voter rich cities. If I were Black I’d vote for only one guy: Al Sharpton.

    Comment by Howard Veit — 1/9/2008 @ 7:48 am

  16. “If I were Black I’d vote for only one guy: Al Sharpton.”

    That just shows how white you are, Howard.

    I’m black and I’m not voting for Obama.

    Who does Massa think I should vote for?

    Comment by David Ehrenstein — 1/9/2008 @ 8:09 am

  17. 3. They never factored in abortion, the only issue for feminists, old and young.

    Excellent point. Obama is proabortion too; however, both the Clintons’ reputation precedes them on the “choice” issue.

    Did Hillary cry her way to victory?

    IMO this was a factor in her victory. Not the only one, but one of them. Whether it was staged or not (IMO it was), it softened her negative projected image which was: “unlikeable and cold.”

    Comment by no one you know — 1/9/2008 @ 8:43 am

  18. Who does Massa think I should vote for?

    RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRON PAUL

    Comment by chaos — 1/9/2008 @ 10:37 am

  19. On the other hand, David E. is on record as claiming to never voting at all. To some, that might suggest this allows him to always vote for the winner!

    Comment by Lurker — 1/9/2008 @ 12:27 pm

  20. Do you think Michael J. Fox’s shaking was staged too, no one you know ?

    That’s what Rush says.

    Comment by David Ehrenstein — 1/9/2008 @ 12:49 pm

  21. David, MJFox was staged…he stated himself later that he deliberately did not take medications before the interviews on TV.

    Google it; Google is your friend.

    Comment by reff — 1/9/2008 @ 12:58 pm

  22. Once again the attention hound ignores others who have expressed the same opinion as I have, to focus on my opinion only. He’s so attentive. Maybe he’ll ask me for my real-life name again today! You know, the one his superior intelligence tricked out of me so fast the other day. LOLOL

    David Ehrenstein, on the other hand, is on topic in another thread, if I’m not mistaken, and doing very well actually 1) staying on topic, and 2) contributing to the discussion. I suggest that he return there.

    Comment by no one you know — 1/9/2008 @ 12:59 pm

  23. David Ehrenstein, on the other hand, is on topic in another thread, if I’m not mistaken, and doing very well actually 1) staying on topic, and 2) contributing to the discussion. I suggest that he return there.

    Hmm, just popped over to the thread in question and perhaps I spoke too soon. Perhaps. We’ll see what happens, I guess. Whether David Ehrenstein or the attention hound will win is up to him.

    Comment by no one you know — 1/9/2008 @ 1:17 pm

  24. Hey, NOYK: the person is question IS capable of interesting and thoughtful commentary. Then it turns into more poo flinging. Oh well. Maybe a “good twin - evil twin” business at the keyboard?

    Comment by Lurker — 1/9/2008 @ 1:28 pm

  25. the person in question IS capable of interesting and thoughtful commentary. Then it turns into more poo flinging.

    Lurker: yep, exactly. Thanks for the reminders lately to people BTW. This is a great politics etc. site and it’s good to see EVERYONE’s views, provided they’re
    -honestly expressed, i.e. not offered from ego or attention grabs, and
    -on the proper topics of the threads.

    Off to another task. See y’all soon.

    Comment by no one you know — 1/9/2008 @ 1:41 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Powered by WordPress.