Comments | truesunn: Hillary Wins NH Primary by 2%

truesunn

Hillary Wins NH Primary by 2%

Jan 08, 2008 23:57

I'm not at all happy about that, but it was a very close race indeed- 39% to 37%, or by numbers, an approximate 6000 vote difference. Barack is still coming on strong, and like one of my friends here said earlier tonight- Iowa and NH represent a very small population compaired to other states, and have a largely white demographic and middle aged ( Read more... )

clinton, politics

Comments 6

rockinbear January 9 2008, 05:31:32 UTC

The delegate count for Hillary and Barack was the same (9 each), as NH is not winner take all.

If I remember right, the Democratic party isn't going to even count the Michigan results as the primary date was moved up against their wishes. It may have been resolved, but I seem to recall there was a major issue with the early date. Yep, it's still an issue ...

http://blog.mlive.com/kalamazoo_gazette_extra/2008/01/primary_confusion_earlier_mich.html

Apparently the national Democratic party doesn't give a darn about Michigan. You won't see most of the candidates campaign there, particularly among the Dems. The Republicans only partially penalized the state for the early date. This leads back to my earlier question. Why do Iowa and New Hampshire deserve dates earlier than anyone else?

truesunn January 9 2008, 07:09:59 UTC

According to BarackObama.com, Michiganders are supposed to vote "Undecided" in the primary. Besides Barack, John Edwards is not on the ballot, either! What a crock, right? There are TONS of blue collar workers out of a job right now. The Dems were retarded to do what they did and move the date up!

Well, Bush doesn't give a crap about us. He had the audacity to basically say there is no economy crisis in a speech in the past few days. Nice.

johnmill79 January 9 2008, 11:01:54 UTC

Yeah, it's as I said before. Many Americans, including myself, don't do well enough educating ourselves on the issues and positions candidates take on them. I'm certainly trying to rectify that, which is why I haven't really decided who I'm for this time. I like Obama at the moment, but will pay close attention to what everybody is talking about.

truesunn January 9 2008, 11:10:53 UTC

Seems like a lot of people our age that were never active before are getting involved in this election. I can tell you I didn't vote for the man I wanted for president last time, I voted for what I felt was the lesser of 2 evils. It's about time we get offered some candidates that we feel are looking out for us! And because so many of them are flying the flag of change right now, we have to weed through them and determine who's talking the talk and who will walk the walk!

revmary January 9 2008, 15:02:52 UTC

It was 3% 39 to 36, that's what I saw anyway ( ... )

truesunn January 9 2008, 19:36:55 UTC

Here's the thing- I don't care if it's a female or a male, I have to look at who I think has the tenacity to unity the people, and to get things done. I'm not a feminist, I feel like I've had every opportunity to accomplish whatever it is I've chosen to stick to. I'm not "beat down" by "the man", in my opinion.

Waiting in the wings... Hmmm... Well, Michelle Obama is an accomplished attorney who's done work with the populace in the past. She could run for a senate seat, then president. That's what Hillary did, correct?

I can agree that we need a shake-up, and we need one ASAP.