New Hampshire primary 2024: Trump projected to win, Haley vows to fight on

DeSantis was polling at only about 6 percent in New Hampshire when he dropped out of the race on Sunday, but 6 percent isn't nothing, and DeSantis's departure could help Trump on the margins tonight. According to an average of crosstabs from national primary polls, 48 percent of DeSantis supporters nationwide said that Trump was their second choice, while only 28 percent said Haley was. In New Hampshire, though, it was a little closer: 48 percent of DeSantis supporters there said Trump was their second choice, while 34 percent said Haley was.

If you take those numbers literally, we'd expect Trump to gain 3 points (48 percent of 6 percent) in New Hampshire from DeSantis's withdrawal, and Haley to gain 2 points (34 percent of 6 percent). However, DeSantis's endorsement of Trump on his way out of the race could mean Trump will gain even more ground. Overall, DeSantis's withdrawal is probably not good for Haley — although one New Hampshire poll, from Emerson College/WHDH-TV, did go against the grain and say that most DeSantis supporters would turn to Haley. These crosstabs all have very small sample sizes, and thus come with larger-than-usual margins of error, so we'll just have to see which of them is closest to the mark!

—Nathaniel Rakich, 538

In a January survey by Emerson College/WHDH-TV, just 52 percent of those who planned to vote in the New Hampshire Republican primary said they were registered as Republicans. Four percent said they were registered as Democrats, and 45 percent said they were registered as independents or with another party. (It’s worth noting that Democrats cannot vote in the Republican primary, so those 4 percent are going to be in for a disappointment when they show up to the polls.)

—Mary Radcliffe, 538

Although Iowa and New Hampshire both lead off the presidential nomination process and are both very white states, they have different-looking Republican electorates. Overall, New Hampshire GOP primary voters are less Republican, conservative and religious than Iowa Republican caucusgoers. This is due not only to differences across the two states' populations, but also divergent electoral rules that give New Hampshire a larger, less right-leaning electorate than Iowa. Thanks in part to these cleavages, the two states have voted for different winners in every open Republican presidential contest dating back to 1980.

One reason for these divergent results is that New Hampshire primary voters are less likely to identify as out-and-out Republicans than Iowa caucusgoers. Differing electoral rules help explain some of this contrast, as caucuses have lower participation rates than primaries. In Iowa, only registered members of a party may participate in that party's caucuses, and caucusgoers must attend these events at an appointed time on a weekday evening. By contrast, state-run primaries like New Hampshire's generally give voters roughly 12 hours to visit their regular polling place to cast a ballot, and they usually include at least a limited option to vote absentee. But critically, New Hampshire permits independent voters to participate in party primaries, unlike Iowa's caucuses and many other states' primaries.

New Hampshire Republican primary voters also tend to be less ideologically conservative than Iowa GOP caucusgoers. Once again, electoral rules play a role in this contrast. In part because of their higher barriers to participation, caucuses tend to attract the most committed and ideologically minded members of a party, whereas primaries attract a broader pool of voters, especially if independents are allowed to participate. Another reason for this ideological split is that New Hampshire's population has a smaller share of white evangelical Christians — a core part of the GOP base — than Iowa does. This is notable because white evangelical Christians are among the Americans most likely to identify as Republican, and they are more conservative than non-evangelical Republicans.

—Geoffrey Skelley, 538

On election night, we're used to poring over maps as votes are reported. In general elections, this can get kinda boring, since the places where Democrats or Republicans do well are often very similar from year to year. Democrats dominated in big cities and college towns? Yawn. Republicans are racking up margins in exurban and rural areas? Wake me up when we get to the unexpected part.

As it turns out, primaries — at least in New Hampshire — have some geographic consistency, too. My University of Pennsylvania colleague Gall Sigler and I estimated just how tightly correlated the results of different Republican primaries in New Hampshire have been across the state's 320 precincts since 2008. We found some evidence that different GOP candidates aligned with the establishment tended to find support in the same communities, while Trumpier candidates also had similar bases of support.

For example, in 2010, the GOP primary for U.S. Senate pitted establishment-backed then-state Attorney General Kelly Ayotte against more conservative political outsider Ovid LaMontagne. Ayotte eked out a victory by under 2,000 votes.

Ayotte's support from establishment-aligned voters was positively correlated with that of then-Sen. John McCain, the winner of New Hampshire's 2008 presidential primary, and Sen. Marco Rubio's support in 2016. That said, both correlations were fairly modest. McCain, Ayotte and Rubio had overlapping, but by no means identical, bases of geographic support. In part, that's because they faced different fields of opposing candidates.

By contrast, Trump's 2016 support in New Hampshire was negatively correlated with McCain's and Ayotte's support. In other words,Trump won with disproportionate support from New Hampshire precincts that had backed Ayotte's and McCain's opponents.

These patterns have held up in more recent elections. In 2022, establishment-aligned former state Senate President Chuck Morse narrowly lost the primary for U.S. Senate to more right-wing retired Brigadier General Don Bolduc, who had publicly doubted the legitimacy of Biden's 2020 win. And Bolduc's performance was positively correlated with Trump's performance in 2016.

All this makes sense: When primaries pit the same factions within each party against each other year after year, they're going to produce similar maps. And in New Hampshire, those differences broadly track with levels of educational attainment: The places where Trumpy candidates tend to do well have smaller college-educated populations, and the places where establishment Republicans do well are more college-educated. I expect to see that divide reappear tonight.

—Dan Hopkins, 538 contributor