ANALYSIS: Four Contests, Four Winners
EmailABC News’ Rick Klein Reports: Reports of their demise were greatly exaggerated.
In handing victory to Sen. John McCain and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, New Hampshire voters again demonstrated the fierce independent streak that has made them among the nation’s toughest judges of presidential candidates.
They also ensured a longer nominating process in both the Republican and the Democratic races, as the campaign moves beyond the two early states and into a tangled mess of contests that will consume much of the four weeks.
McCain and Clinton benefitted from different cross-currents than Iowa’s winners, Sen. Barack Obama and former governor Mike Huckabee. But they immediately become frontrunners — and maybe THE frontrunners — in their respective nomination fights.
The stunner was Clinton, who pulled off one of the more remarkable comebacks in modern political history, recovering from defeat in Iowa in just five days’ time. She regains control of the presidential race that in some sense she never should have lost, stunning even her own campaign, which was bracing for a crushing defeat.
In seeing his lead slip away in New Hampshire, Obama may have lost his best chance to lock up the nomination. All the angst, all the worry, all the uncertainty that consumed the Clinton campaign just hours ago now settles firmly on the Obama camp; it’s Obama’s campaign that now has to fend off the negative storylines that — as Clinton knows so well — can be so difficult to turn around.
The McCain victory is less of a shocker, but the ramifications are no less important. There are still five Republicans who can capture the nomination, but McCain becomes the odds-on favorite — a remarkable turnabout for a candidate whose campaign imploded six months ago.
Both former senator John Edwards and former governor Mitt Romney now face serious threats to their viability. They are under tight pressure to start delivering victories; Edwards was counting on Obama to knock out Clinton, and Romney wanted to win Iowa and New Hampshire but wound up with neither.
Four major contests — two for the Democrats, two for the Republicans — and four different winners. This campaign has been all about who offers change; the first five days that included voting have shown us that everything we think we know is subject to, well, change.
Gulf of Mexico to Become Gulf of America? 
Can Mitt Romney Win Conservatives Back?
Ha ha, the people spoke and they defeated the pundits the media manipulation who are driving the “wave”!! It seems the wave got out of gas, a pretty and inspiring speech without really touching the issues is not enough!
They were written off Hillary in the same way they did to McCain and Edwards. Now we have a race and we hope the people force the candidates to talk about real issues!
Posted by: Peter | January 9, 2008, 12:02 am 12:02 am
Congratulation to New Hampshire Voters!
You listen to your HEART. YOU DID THE RIGHT CHOICE DON’T BELIEVE ON POLLSTER; NATIONAL MEDIA; PUNDITS; FOLLOW YOUR HEART. CONGRATULATION SENATOR CLINTON I HOPE ALL WOMEN IN AMERICA SHOULD VOTE FOR YOU AS THE FIRST WOMEN PRESIDENT IN AMERICA. I HOPE ALL WOMEN WILL STAND UP AND BREAK THE WALL AND MAKE HISTORY THAT A WOMAN CAN LEAD A COUNTRY – FOR IT WILL TAKE TIME AND CENTURY TO FIND A WOMAN WHO HAS THE BRAIN AND CAN LEAD THE COUNTRY IN DAY ONE!!! YES, EXPERIENCE CAN MAKE CHANGE A REALITY!
GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!
Posted by: Samson Lim | January 9, 2008, 12:36 am 12:36 am
Oh my goodness, thank heaven Hillary won NH, and she goes on to win the nomination to become the first woman president. No one is perfect, but she has compassion for her country and wherewithall to put the ‘UNITED’ back into the United States of America. I hope that the rest of the country think about what each candidate has to offer and not listen to the celebrities, spin and hype, go with your gut America. May the candidate who can hold their hand on their heart, pledge allegiance to the flag and country and give of their best to us all regardless of gender, color and party WIN.
Posted by: Maggie | January 9, 2008, 12:50 am 12:50 am
To me, it’s not about the hype–it’s not about who could be the first woman president (and that’s why we should vote for her) or could be the first black president (and that’s why we should vote for him) or who is the best orator–it’s about who THINKS and has the best ideas to solve this country’s problems. It’s about someone who’s not only “talking the talk” but also has walked the walk. I congratulate Hillary (and Bill) for refocusing this race and pointing a laser light on Obama’s vague platitudes. Kudos to Hillary for kicking butt (and it’s taken me a long time to finally support her).
Posted by: Jay | January 9, 2008, 1:33 am 1:33 am
Congrats Sheep voters for voting for Ms. Bush – if she wins, expect 4 more long years of the same ‘ol stuff
Posted by: Doug | January 9, 2008, 1:52 am 1:52 am
Hillary won! But what many are afraid of as mentioned above, if Obama becomes the candidate will the allow him to live. My answer is yes, our nation is hurting frome the Bush administration. Everyone is looking for change, Obama wants EVERYONE to unite and work together. It is time that we start to to place trust in someone who is going to make a difference ! We need our Nation to be strengthed. Our country is not ready for a woman, and if she becomes the candidate, we are setting up a win for the Republicans, and another four years !
Posted by: Dolores Simmons | January 9, 2008, 5:27 am 5:27 am
It seems like the media and the pollsters, in the immortal words of Ricky Ricardo, have “some ‘splainin’ to do” this morning. This is a campaign, not a coronation. This process is about creating a constructive dialogue between the voters and the candidates — who they are, what they care about, how they will lead, how they will govern. The media and the pollsters are supposed to REPORT on that dialogue as it progresses, providing news and expert, informed analysis and context, checking the pulse of things. But so far, they both seem to be completely out of touch with their audiences. Big loser last night — the media! Big winner — the democratic process!
Lesson learned: Let’s not be too hasty about declaring winners. Forty-eight states have yet to hold a primary. This election is about finding candidates to become the next president, not choosing America’s Next Top Idol!
Posted by: EC | January 9, 2008, 5:36 am 5:36 am
Hillary won the Older womens vote so all younger voters 18+ need to start showing up in force at the polls.And New Hampshire was so close I think there should be a Recount.And it appears maybe Oprah might need to step in again if she would?
Posted by: Listen Up | January 9, 2008, 5:55 am 5:55 am
Two states down and the pundits have been wrong twice…Hillary is the frontrunner again? She’s sure to win the nomination? Well, this is one over-40 woman who won’t be voting for her under any circumstances. She will only polarize the country and galvanize the Republicans against her. To misquote our current President “She’s a divider, not a uniter.” It’s time to put the past (the Clintons) in the past and move on to the future of a better America.
Posted by: Michele | January 9, 2008, 6:17 am 6:17 am
Michelle, actually YOU are the divider, not Hillary Clinton.
YOU say you won’t be voting for Clinton “under any circumstances”…
Yet she just got more votes — by far — in an actual election than any of the other candidates, either Democratic or Republican.
You need to deal with that.
In addition, when BClinton left office, 70% of America thought America was going in the right direction. Currently, 70% of America thinks we’re going to the WRONG direction.
It’s certainly not the Clintons that the nation doesn’t like.
Who cares if Hillary Clinton “galvanizes Republicans” against her?!!? Don’t give power to the Republicans by allowing them to dictate your vote.
One of the main reason I support Clinton is to stick it in the eye of the Republicans!
(Yeah, bad, bad me… I’m not quite ready to be united with Bush Republicans yet.)
There are more Democrats and Independents than there are Bush Republicans.
Let’s let the process play out, and then ALL vote AGAINST those “galvanized Republicans” by voting FOR the Democratic candidate, whoever he or she may be.
Don’t try to divide us, Michelle, with your silly fear of “galvanized Republicans.” ANY Democrat who wins the nomination will beat ANY Republican.
Posted by: Jan | January 9, 2008, 7:01 am 7:01 am
Fortunately, the voters of New Hampshire did not fall prey to the wishes of a biased media who by trick and false poll projections promoted the Presidency of an unqualified candidate, Senator Obama. On the Republican side, the voters correctly placed Mitt Romney, the carpetbagger, on the verge of extinction. Senator McCain, the war mongering hypocrite, another darling of the media, will meet his political Waterloo in the upcoming primaries. The media needs to improve on its “water boarding” methods to sway the voters its way, possibly by flooding the already saturated airwaves with more celebrity gossip in hopes of deterring voter attention away from important matters.
Posted by: mongo100 | January 9, 2008, 7:14 am 7:14 am
To Jan: You are so right in every word you said to Michelle. The media was building up Obama like he already was president. I stayed up until 12:30am and did they get a shocker. Apparently they were looking for another win for Obama that didn’t take place. New Hampshire was the first primary and she won it. Good for her. Its time we need a women president. Argentina just voted one in and the people love her. I believe Hillary can unite the country and we will be America again.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | January 9, 2008, 7:54 am 7:54 am
Jan, I’m sorry, but I couldn’t agree less with this idea that Clinton is a uniter. Yes, she united some democrats. Unfortunately, Democrats make up less than half the voting population, and as Michele notes, ignoring the rest just isn’t a good tactic. The fact is, Republicans have a right to a voice too. If we have a true uniter as a president, I think America will make great strides as a nation, and I can’t see Clinton doing that. Policy-wise, Barack and Hillary are effectively the same. (look up healthcare before you repeat the idea that “obama doesnt cover everybody.” Thats true, but its not the whole story.) So, we need to decide on other attributes than policy, and with respect to that, my vote would go for Obama.
Posted by: Thomas | January 9, 2008, 8:00 am 8:00 am
Congrats to COMEBACK GAL!!!!!!!!! :-)
Posted by: Tommy | January 9, 2008, 8:38 am 8:38 am
Its called “blowback”, since we have used covert operations in the middle-east for decades, the people there resent our “governments policies”. You and so many are ignorant to the fact that the United States is seen as a bully by some countries. Our foreign policy stinks. We have and do support many dictators that suppress their own people. Why did we invade Iraq? They had nothing to do with 911….Suddam was not a good person yet we supplied him with the chemicals that he used on the Kurds and Iranians during their war.
Read the facts before you start spouting ignorant statements. We supported and supplied weapons to the Afghans against Russia, and who was part of those Afghanistan fighters? Osama Bin Laden was there fighting….we supported the same people that attacked us. Thats “blowback”. There are many other details , like the money for 911 coming from Pakistan and 11 of the terrorist on the flights were from Saudi Arabia. SSo now you tell me why we attacked Iraq?
Posted by: judarama | January 9, 2008, 9:29 am 9:29 am
If you respect a well-run campaign, you have to congratulate Hillary on her win, and the strategy that worked for her. Presuming the vote count was accurate, you have to conclude that Independents pushed McCain over the top, and while Obama won the Independent vote over Clinton, not enough of them voted Democrat. Also, older women Democrats pushed Hillary over the top. Hillary hasn’t changed. She did not ‘find her voice’. She and her well-tested team calculated that if she held a media moment with older women and got a bit emotional, the video will dominate the news. It did. She won. But she is the same Hillary this morning that she was last week. And she is mortal. She fakes tears one eye at a time. Hillary’s back if older women Democrats in the rest of the country buy it. We’ll see.
Posted by: SteveW | January 9, 2008, 10:39 am 10:39 am
Mitt Romney has finished strong in three primaries now. He won Wyoming (but the media would never tell you that) and finished a strong second in Iowa and New Hampshire. The fun will start when Alvin McCain and Mike Hickabee have to start chewing on each other. Then the cream, Romney, will rise to the top. Go Romney in Michigan!
Posted by: ComeOn | January 9, 2008, 12:54 pm 12:54 pm
MITT ROMNEY is the man we need to lead AMERICA NOW!!!!!!
Mitt is the most qualified to change the way things are done in Washington.
He is a man of integrity who gets things done. He will strengthen our ecomomy and enhance relations with the world. He has a proven record of getting things done in every area where he has worked.
WAKE UP AMERICA!!!!!
We are so lucky this man wants the job.
Jill in Columbus, Ohio
Posted by: jill ensminger | January 9, 2008, 12:54 pm 12:54 pm
What bothers me the most is that people are not seeing the age group of supporters each candidate has. Sure, Clinton won by a small margin but… her support is mainly over the age of 65, according to the statistics? No offense, but this is far from the working class, and while they should have an equal voice, they are not the future of this country, their time has already passed. Obama and Edwards have way more supporters under the age of 30, and if you guys want people to cause change, you select people who would be most affected by it, those that are working, making families, studying, and living now, not the retired, which 40 years ago where the driving force of this country, and yes they deserve the best, but they should not decide our future, one they will not live in!!!
Posted by: David S. | January 9, 2008, 2:16 pm 2:16 pm
As a woman, I can fully understand why there are women out there who want Hillary to win. I would love to see a woman as President. Unfortunately, that woman is not Hillary Clinton. I think we all need to remember it’s more then gender here. It’s who can do the best job and lead our country to where it needs to be. We are slowly falling apart (Thank you very much GWB JR) and we need someone strong and wonderful to put those peices back together. Barack is that person. Listening to him speak is like coming up for air after being buried underground. He is an inspiration and for those who truly wish to vote based on minority remember that having an African American president is just as big of a win as a woman president. Barack Obama is the answer to everything we every needed!
Posted by: Christa J. in MN | January 9, 2008, 2:33 pm 2:33 pm
There are 46 states left to hold primaries. I would guess that a majority of voters have already made up their minds who they will vote for. The campaigning of the past few weeks won’t have that much affect on people. The big states haven’t even been in the limelight yet, and winning 2-3 of them can propel any candidate to the top. I’m dissappointed that the media and some voters claim that the race is already won. Just because my vote isn’t until Feb. 5th doesn’t mean it shouldn’t count.
Posted by: Actual Human | January 9, 2008, 2:41 pm 2:41 pm
David S: How do you know the ages of the people who supported Hillary??? Are you going by the media reports? They can’t even predict the winners let alone what age/gender, etc. votes which way. I am supporting Hillary and I am no where near 65 and even if I were, don’t you think a 65 year old has a right to think of their future? I guess that your young enough to be part of that “me” generation. Some of us think about America as a whole and the problems we are facing. We need experience to correct this mess of an economy and a responsible exit from Iraq. Your “me” generation mentality just does not get it.
Posted by: Judy | January 9, 2008, 3:00 pm 3:00 pm
David and Christa have it right: You can’t dimiss (as the earliest posts did) Obama as just “pretty speeches”. The fact it that the man is inspiring because of his message of domestic unity and restoring this country’s reputation on the world stage. His victory in Iowa and the lion share of his appeal is to independents and newcomers who have never voted before. He has done nothing less than CHANGE THE FACE OF THE ELECTORATE. I believe that Hillary would be a great president, but the fact is that about 45% of the electorate hates her guts with the red hot intensity of a thousand suns. Therefore, while she is could be the president of the blue states, she could never be President of the United States of America. This is probably unfair, but it is true, none-the-less.
Posted by: Mac | January 9, 2008, 3:22 pm 3:22 pm
I don’t dismiss Obama as just pretty speeches. I think that he could be a uniter. Beyond that I have seen so real substance. It seems that the media is afraid to ask the tough questions of him as they do of Hillary. The media has pretty much given him a free ride up until now. I hope that changes. I am for Hillary but could vote for Obama if he wins the democratic nomination. My test for him is: let the media knock the wind out of his sails and beat him down as they have Hillary for years and if he can take a punch and keep on ticking, he might be able to hold up to the republican attack machine and possibly get my vote.
Posted by: Judy | January 9, 2008, 3:30 pm 3:30 pm
Yes, Judy, we hear a lot about how Obama hasn’t been vetted like Clinton has. But many issues have been raised (his drug use, his lack of experience, his Dad was a muslim-if you can count that as a negative)but the lack of experience problem is the only one people seem to give a flip about. That could change in the general. My question is: If it is really about experience, shouldn’t Richardson and Biden be duking this out? I was originally in the experience matters camp (and for Richardson for that reason). Now, I’m not so sure.
Posted by: Mac | January 9, 2008, 3:41 pm 3:41 pm
Hillary reminds me too much of an angry school principal telling students and faculty what to think and how to feel and that if they deviate from her agenda it will lead to personal and national ruin. That is the extent of her experience in my view.
Posted by: Actual Human | January 9, 2008, 4:01 pm 4:01 pm
The media is communist led
Posted by: Dale | January 9, 2008, 5:16 pm 5:16 pm
I will choose the candidate who has the following, curiosity, creativity, communication, character, courage, conviction, competence, charisma and common sense. in my opinion Obama meets all of these, clinton does not.
Posted by: Bob | January 9, 2008, 6:08 pm 6:08 pm
It amazes me to see so many people who want to put ms. Clinton in the white house. So quickly we all forget that it was her husband who singlehandedly sent all our high paid manufacturing jobs out of this country. Give them another chance and the only change will be what is left in our pockets ,, if we can even get jobs.
Posted by: Murray | January 9, 2008, 8:15 pm 8:15 pm
Colonel Ray, Hmmm, somehow I can see a gun rack and a pickup truck in your future if you don’t already own one.
It’s that fear based small minded thinking(or lack of)that you just spouted off that got George “they hate us for our freedom” W. Bush elected for a second time(that is if he truly was elected either time but that’s another story).
I’m sure you want to stick with the old guard so they can continue the military/industrial complex just the way it is.What the heck, you’re a retired Colonel.The military is going to take care of you. What about the young unranked soldiers that come back here and are forgotten? What about the majority of Americans that are watching their world crumble as their jobs are getting shipped abroad,their houses are in foreclosure,they don’t have health insurance to take care of their family and social security will be nonexistent for them when they come of age? What about them? Do you think they care what a man’s middle name is,or where he went to school or his religion? No they want hope for change. They want to have something to believe in.Yes I will say it they want CHANGE. I laugh when people talk about Obama’s lack of experience.Maybe that’s exactly what we want.Someone who isn’t tainted by the corruption that exists today.Somebody that still has hope and dreams for an America that the rest of world cherishes not fears.That’s how you truly end terrorism.Yes,we have to go in and stop the monster we have created.We have to end this war that is sucking us dry and go after the real threat the one we forgot about so George could have his war.Once the true perps for 911 have been brought to jusstice maybe then we can focus on repairing our reputation around the world and make this country great again.
We need an Obama or an Edwards to fight against corporate/government corruption,lobbyists and special interest groups. It is the last stand for the middle class and the poor. I don’t think that this country can survive another Bush act-a-like into office.At least the common man won’t survive.I long for a change.It is time to bring “we the people…” back into the picture as the true voice of America.
Posted by: pops | January 9, 2008, 8:48 pm 8:48 pm
check the delegate votes. mrs. clinton is still ahead and no issues about percentages should discourage anyone! the people don’t realize yet that it can’t be about religion, not about race, no about parties and their restrictions with each other; it’s about the issues and the best way to settle them for all of us. how many people in iowa go hungry every day? much les than the population of my town i’m sure. we have two shelters full in our county and they still try to say there’s no money to keep them open. fyi: we’re a republican district trying to go democrat!
Posted by: gwenn | January 10, 2008, 1:43 am 1:43 am