Clinton’s stunner and McCain’s comeback.
-
- January
- 8
What is it about New Hampshire and the Clintons?
In 1992, New Hampshire made Bill Clinton the so-called Comeback Kid. And tonight they gave Hillary Clinton a stunning victory over Barack Obama. It was close, but both the AP and CNN are projecting her the winner.
“Over the last week, I listened to you. And in the process I found my own voice,” Clinton said. “I felt like we all spoke with our own hearts.”
The win comes a day after some polls showed Clinton behind by double digits.
New Hampshire also provided some magic to Sen. John McCain tonight, giving him a huge win over Mitt Romney. Only a few months ago, McCain’s campaign was thought to be dead.
“My friends, I am past the age when I can claim the noun, “kid,” no matter what adjective precedes it,” McCain said in his remarks. “But tonight we sure showed them what a comeback looks like. When the pundits declared us finished, I told them, “I’m going to New Hampshire, where the voters don’t let you make their decision for them.”
As expected, Rudy Giuliani was trounced, finishing with less than 10 percent of the vote.
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, January 8th, 2008 at 11:27 pm by Glenn Blain.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
| 
Email This
Below letter is from one of Americas brightest pollsters who is explaining what went wrong with the polls with Obama & Hillary last night.
(I worked with Matt while I was the Deputy Campaign Manager on a New York Statewide race/campaign in New York last year)
Thought you would like to know since all who read this blog are political savvy people. Last night was an embarrassment to the media, politicians, pollsters, experts & campaigns. (Reminds you of Truman
vsDewey)Otherwise, all my predictions in Iowa & NH have been on target and better then CNN’s (LOL)…….
Jim Kelly – NY Conservative Campaigns
Jim –
Just yesterday, some major media polls showed Barack Obama with a 10-point lead over Hillary Clinton. But Clinton won the New Hampshire primary by at least 3%. At the same time, John McCain posted a much stronger lead over Mitt Romney than polling predicated.
The polls were dead wrong tonight. (And so was I. I told many of you that Barack Obama would sail through New Hampshire on his way to the presidency.)
Why? In effect, the pollsters double-counted New Hampshire independents.
How does this work? In order to survey likely voters, pollsters ask a series of “screener� questions. Here is how one public pollster, American Research Group (ARG), asks their screener:
“Would you say that you definitely plan to vote in the 2008 Republican presidential primary, that you might vote in the 2008 Republican presidential primary, or that you will probably not vote in the 2008 Republican presidential primary?�
Typically, pollsters treat each party separately when conducting primary polls. One survey will poll the Republican primary (and all non-Republicans will be screened out), and a separate survey will poll the Democrats (and vice versa). This is the case for two reasons. First, most states don’t have open primaries, so cross-party voting isn’t a concern. Second is cost, doubly true in internal campaign polling. It would be a waste of money for, e.g., Chris Dodd to poll Republican primary voters.
Several well-regarded campaign pollsters will travel to South Carolina tomorrow to find themselves in hot water with their campaign managers.
So let’s think this through. Pollster X conducts his survey in the Republican primary. Independents are allowed into the poll, while Democrats are not. Then Pollster X conducts his survey among Democrats. Independents are allowed into the poll a second time, while Republicans are not.
This is the polling equivalent of being allowed to vote twice. You create a situation where a voter would say this: “Well, if you were asking me about the Republican primary, I’d vote for McCain. But since you’re asking me about the Democratic primary, I’ll vote for Obama.� In fact, it creates the bizarre possibility that the same individual New Hampshire voter could be literally polled twice.
It comes down to what we call “sampling error.� Since the same Independents were allowed into both surveys, the poll’s sample didn’t look like the actual primary electorate. The 10-point Obama lead was only a paper lead  those were actually McCain voters who were erroneously allowed into the Democratic primary polls.
Should pollsters have known this would happen? I’d argue yes. We knew that both Obama and McCain both had wide support among Independents. At first glance, none of the pollsters realized this and changed their models accordingly.
One proper way to screen would have been something like this:
“Q1. Would you say that you definitely plan to vote in the primary, that you might vote in the primary, or that you will probably not vote in the primary?
Q2. Do you plan to vote in the Republican presidential primary, or the Democratic presidential primary?�
Notice that every likely voter is allowed into the poll, and then pushed into the appropriate primary. No segment of the population has the possibility of entering both primaries.
We desperately need to re-think our turnout models in the future, or we will continue to struggle with open primaries, early voting, etc., etc…
Hope this is helpful. If you have any more questions, just ask.
Best wishes, – Matt
Matt Dabrowski
matt@goppollster.com
thanks for the polling information..very helpful but I think
that in a large part the Democrats in New Hampshire realized
that if Obama defeated Clinton by a subtantial margin, the
nomination would be decided and Obama would be the nominee
I believe that New Hampshire Democrats put their toe in the
water and concluded that it was way too early too make that
judgmment based on the word “Change” and the oratory surrounding it..In other words…closing Mrs Clinton out
before understanding what Change meant as interpreted by
Senator Obama was not in the interest of the nation..and
that crowning a one term Senator whose prior claim to
fame was a seat in the Illinois State Senate, regardless
of how good he made you feel by his soaring oratory,
was not how the presidency should be decided..ie they
simply chickened out and voted for a longer contest
where the views of each of the candidates could be
further explored..After all February 5th is not that
far away..and why should New Hampshire Democrats shoulder
the responsibility all by themselves for selecting the
Democratic Nominee…
Agree with above answer also as that was one the analogies.
Those conducting the polls gave false hope to ALL branches involved in last nights showing. Pollsters needed to find what went wrong as the Obama engine was driving off of these poll numbers.
They have not blown polls in many years as the one they did last night.
the will be a democrat in the white house polls or no polls
I wonder how many people told pollsters that they were voting for (or voted for depending if they were asked going in or coming out) Obama because that is the “PC” thing to do and then voted for Clinton or Edwards?
Since I am a huge Buffalo Bills & NFL fan….Quick pun…..
In a news conference Deanna Favre announced she will be the starting QB for the Packers this coming Sunday.. She claimed she is qualified to be starting QB because she has spent the past 16 years married to Brett while he played QB for the Packers.
Because of this she understands how to pick up a corner blitz and knows the terminology of the Packers offense. A poll of Packers fans shows that 50% of those polled supported the move.
Does this sounds idiotic and unbelievable to you? Yet Hillary Clinton makes the same claims as to why she is qualified to be President and 50% of democrats polled agreed.
Jim Kelly – NY Conservative Campaigns
Except that analogy doesn’t hold up when you consider that Hillary is in her 2nd term as a US Senator, is a trained lawyer, and has served on the boards of several major companies. Whether or not you like her, she has credentials at least as good as W’s, arguably better. She’s more than just the average hausfrau.
Besides, Deanna doesn’t have Brett’s passing ability…
Last night was a total waste of almost everyone’s time,
and so were the days leading up to it.
That Hillary lives to fight at least another month is one
thing. Ditto for McCain, etc.
I think the real story here is how poorly the pollsters,
talking heads and rest of the media did their jobs. They
were all swept up in “Obamarama.”
This has happened before, too, in other years.
Now the explanations and excuses come crawling out.
But in my opinion, anyone who listens to and believes any
of their nonsense and guesswork before the voters actually
vote deserves the dis-service they are doing themselves.
I was among the many who fell for it this time. But no more.
Jim Kelly a Bills’ fan? I would think so. “Wide Right.”
But he is also “right” with his Packer’s analogy.
I posed the same question a few days ago by asking if,
on a flight to Chicago or wherever, you’d want the
pilot’s wife at the controls.
Hillary has no real management experience—except
she she fudged the books at the Rose Law Firm and
did manage the movers who stripped the White House
when she and Billy hit the bricks.
Based on her intimate knowledge of the Packer offense, other than physically, Deanne Favre might well be preferable behind center than Colin Cole or Justin Harrell.