Consider this an open thread on this topic. I'll start things out by noting three things. First, people made their choices late. According to the exit polls over a third of voters decided in the last 3 days. Secondly, the last 36 hours of coverage was devoted to two stories that in tandem could indeed have moved a fair number of undecideds into Clinton's column - the "humanizing" choking up incident mixed with the press incessantly discussing how Obama was about to completely blast Clinton out of the water on Tuesday. Finally, look at where the margin came from - the urban areas (or what are by New Hampshire's standards urban areas). Maybe it wasn't any of the stuff the press is talking about - maybe it was simply another amazing turnout job by Michael Whouley.
Fyi, in the town I was working in Obama got 135% of his vote target - and still lost by a lot. My first take on it is it was the undecideds + Whouley. But clearly the incessant playing of the gender card had an effect too, and since that's what's the press has really focused on in the last few days I'd expect that to become an even more influential force in this campaign.
UPDATEL Ezra Klein (who's had more time to check out the post-election numbers than I have) has this useful post on the topic. For what it's worth I ran into a fair number of people who liked "Obama or McCain" or in some cases "Obama, McCain or Huckabee" and some of the volunteers who'd been in our precinct for quite a bit of time were sure McCain would depress Obama's numbers. So it is indeed possible that McCain's win hurt Obama.
Posted by armand at January 10, 2008 04:47 PM | TrackBack | Posted to PoliticsBtw, on the appealing to women topic, and how she's presenting herself, I should note oddest bit of her literature I saw in NH: A piece on Clinton's work for children and health care and education, the kind of bright, shiny, thing that even noted her marriage (and maybe her daughter's birth). So far so good. I can see her wanting to note her accomplishments not tied to her husband's presidency. But this is the weird thing - it was covered in photographs of her, not one of which was more recent than maybe 15 years ago. Am I the only one who finds that really odd?
Posted by: Armand at January 10, 2008 04:59 PM | PERMALINKI agree that the McCain win hurt Obama, but I get the impression that many Independents voted on the Republican side for McCain because they (and we all) thought Obama had it locked up.
The decision of which primary to participate was chosen for them...one was up for grabs, the other wasn't.
Posted by: Shaun at January 11, 2008 09:55 AM | PERMALINKI don't disagree with that at all. I think the perceptions of the state of the race at 7am on Tuesday morning likely did affect the results, at least to a small degree.
And actually that's also tied to my thoughts about how maybe part of the reason women swung so heavily to Hillary Clinton - according to what they read and hear they thought she was going to be completely sunk, and some of those voters wanted to stand up for an industrious (supposed) underdog.
Posted by: Armand at January 11, 2008 10:43 AM | PERMALINK