New Hampshire Race Watching

mannybolonemannybolone Los Angeles, CA 15,025 Posts
edited January 2008 in Strut Central
Clinton 64,743 39%Obama 60,322 36 Edwards 27,578 17 Richardson 7,889 5 Kucinich 2,415 1 Gravel 230 0 McCain 49,925 37%Romney 42,288 31 Huckabee 15,382 11 Giuliani 11,709 9 Paul 10,654 8 Thompson 1,613 1 61% reporting
«13

  Comments


  • clinton 40%-obama 35% with 13 percent reporting..

    new comeback kid?

  • mannybolonemannybolone Los Angeles, CA 15,025 Posts
    You mean Clinton? She was never that far down; Iowa was an exception to how her national polling has gone. Obama's looking good though. Edwards...not so much so far.

    Meanwhile, Romney's 0-2 but we'll have to see how Rudy does once Florida rolls around.

  • phongonephongone 1,652 Posts
    Dude, I counted Hillary out, good for her.

  • You mean Clinton? She was never that far down; Iowa was an exception to how her national polling has gone. Obama's looking good though. Edwards...not so much so far.

    Meanwhile, Romney's 0-2 but we'll have to see how Rudy does once Florida rolls around.

    Dude, if Obama doesn't win tonight his candidacy is fucked. Because so much of this process is perception and everyone was assuming he would take NH handily.

  • knewjakknewjak 1,231 Posts
    You mean Clinton? She was never that far down; Iowa was an exception to how her national polling has gone. Obama's looking good though. Edwards...not so much so far.

    Meanwhile, Romney's 0-2 but we'll have to see how Rudy does once Florida rolls around.

    Dude, if Obama doesn't win tonight his candidacy is fucked. Because so much of this process is perception and everyone was assuming he would take NH handily.


    yeah, I'm not liking how it looks so far either. However, only 51 of 301 the precints have reported so far. Like an ebay auction in its final moments, I keep hitting refresh on the browser on the result page. maybe its gonna jump, ok, maybe its gonnna jump ..now.

    http://election.cbsnews.com/campaign2008/state.shtml?state=NH

  • mannybolonemannybolone Los Angeles, CA 15,025 Posts
    You mean Clinton? She was never that far down; Iowa was an exception to how her national polling has gone. Obama's looking good though. Edwards...not so much so far.

    Meanwhile, Romney's 0-2 but we'll have to see how Rudy does once Florida rolls around.

    Dude, if Obama doesn't win tonight his candidacy is fucked. Because so much of this process is perception and everyone was assuming he would take NH handily.

    saying - perception changes everyday. We're still at the front end of this race.

  • Something seems supsicious with these numbers.

  • Something seems supsicious with these numbers.



  • And here comes Edwards with his tired ass Horror Stories in American. This guy needs to STFU and let the real candidates run.

  • AP says Hillary won. remember conventional wisdom was that she would likely lose by double digits.

  • jleejlee 1,539 Posts
    conventional wisdom

    you guys are killing me. polls 2 weeks ago had Hillary winning. Polls right after Iowa had Obama winning by like around 5%. And polls Sunday & yesterday had him winning by like 11%.

    nothing about what has transpired over the past 2 weeks strikes me as 'conventional wisdom'.

    i think what you meant to say is "based off yesterdays polls, people thought Obama was going to win."

    seriously....you guys are worse than the pundits some time.

  • Obama just conceded.

  • obama couldnt have been hurt that badly by losing. still seems like a toss up.
    he still got 8 delegates and, despite his crossover appeal, new hampshire got a hellof a lot of snowflakes. obama should benefit from south carolina and a black majority.

    funny shit i read about the GOP race was that Romney'stwo second place finishes were "bitter losses" since he put millions of his dollars into the campaign and hoped to win one. HAHAHA fuck you bitch...money cant always buy victory and you are still a corny mormon robot vacillator. go suck an egg.

  • conventional wisdom

    you guys are killing me. polls 2 weeks ago had Hillary winning. Polls right after Iowa had Obama winning by like around 5%. And polls Sunday & yesterday had him winning by like 11%.

    nothing about what has transpired over the past 2 weeks strikes me as 'conventional wisdom'.

    i think what you meant to say is "based off yesterdays polls, people thought Obama was going to win."

    seriously....you guys are worse than the pundits some time.


    you're an idiot. a mere reference to conventional wisdom was to point out a seeming consensus opinion in the mainstream us press that had formed over the past few weeks that was obviously distorted.

  • The expectation across the board was that Obama would win this decisively. Clinton herself said earlier today she did not expect to win. Obama still has a chance I think, but who the hell knows. I guess polls don't mean anything anymore.

  • corny mormon robot vacillator.

    Lots of Independents went to McCain, I guess.

  • coselmedcoselmed 1,114 Posts
    I guess polls don't mean anything anymore.

    They stopped meaning anything in the 2000 presidential election.

  • CosmoCosmo 9,768 Posts
    J. Lee is no idiot.

  • izm707izm707 1,107 Posts
    Obama leaving ith Stevie Wonder...

  • mannybolonemannybolone Los Angeles, CA 15,025 Posts
    you're an idiot. a mere reference to conventional wisdom was to point out a seeming consensus opinion in the mainstream us press that had formed over the past few weeksdays[/b] that was obviously distorted.

  • mannybolonemannybolone Los Angeles, CA 15,025 Posts
    I guess polls don't mean anything anymore.

    They stopped meaning anything in the 2000 presidential election.

    Polls aren't worthless but they aren't gospel either. Like any sampling, there's always a margin of error and more to today's point: what someone says yesterday but decides at the voting booth today are two different animals.

    Personally, I like that things keep swinging. We shouldn't be crowning anyone the candidate in early January!

  • Obama leaving ith Stevie Wonder...

    was gonna say... good way to exit after a damn good speech


  • izm707izm707 1,107 Posts
    I'm waiting for his next speech. Maybe we'll get some Stylistics or some Whatnauts. Who knows?..

  • coselmedcoselmed 1,114 Posts


    Polls aren't worthless but they aren't gospel either.

    Okay, I should have said, "The 2000 presidential election revealed the inherent limitations of exit polling."

    The chair of the New Hampshire Republican Party (a 35-year-old guy) made an interesting point on CSPAN this morning that the primary method of polling (by telephone) is outdated, since most people our age don't have a land line.

  • I guess polls don't mean anything anymore.

    They stopped meaning anything in the 2000 presidential election.

    Polls aren't worthless but they aren't gospel either. Like any sampling, there's always a margin of error and more to today's point: what someone says yesterday but decides at the voting booth today are two different animals.

    Personally, I like that things keep swinging. We shouldn't be crowning anyone the candidate in early January!

    I doubt these polls have a margin of error of 12 or 13 percent. Anyway, I was really hoping strongly for an Obama win tonight because it's my hunch that Hillary's strength is in some of the big Feb. 5 states. The states were she seemed most vulnerable happened to be these early states. If she's winning those as well I think Obama will have a real tough time regaining momentum.

  • mannybolonemannybolone Los Angeles, CA 15,025 Posts
    I doubt these polls have a margin of error of 12 or 13 percent.

    Yeah, which is why I also pointed out that polling and voting are different beasts. I don't think polling is bullshit just b/c it's not always accurate.

  • ReynaldoReynaldo 6,054 Posts
    Reality check.

  • What utility does polling have if it cannot accurately predict outcomes (within a reasonable margin of error)?

  • mannybolonemannybolone Los Angeles, CA 15,025 Posts
    What utility does polling have if it cannot accurately predict outcomes (within a reasonable margin of error)?

    Polling does not have to be 100% accurate, all the time, to be useful. If it were MOSTLY accurate, wouldn't that have a utility? I'm surprised anyone would demand that it be infallible.

    Of course, some would argue that polling has always been a voodoo science. I leave that to statisticians to tussle over.

  • coselmedcoselmed 1,114 Posts
    What utility does polling have if it cannot accurately predict outcomes (within a reasonable margin of error)?

    Polling does not have to be 100% accurate, all the time, to be useful. If it were MOSTLY accurate, wouldn't that have a utility? I'm surprised anyone would demand that it be infallible.

    Of course, some would argue that polling has always been a voodoo science. I leave that to statisticians to tussle over.

    Hey, don't feel bad...I believe in astrology!
Sign In or Register to comment.