Posted on 01/08/2008 7:32:20 PM PST by Aristotelian
In a stunning upset victory, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton beat Sen. Barack Obama in Tuesday's Democratic presidential primary election in New Hampshire.
“Hillary has a huge hidden vote among women”
I don’t know any of those women. (in Texas) The lady who cuts my hair is Gay and she knows no one who would vote for her. (50 something)
Must be the older Yankee women who have rocks for brains.
One would think older gals would know better.
Make that - Hillary has a huge hidden vote among vulnerable, cry-baby women. You know the type - those who never believe their trouble-making kids are at fault for anything, those who stay with husbands who commit adultery or abuse them, those who have no clue about how they are being manipulated. Those women.
But the alternative, Obama or Edwards are just as unacceptable to lead our country. It is pathetic that out of all the qualified people in the Democratic Party, these are top contenders. The others are just "also rans."
Unfortunately, there is no great spark in the Republican Party, either. Most of us like Thompson, and he could/would be a strong leader who could take charge in a commanding way, but the fact is, he just isn't doing it. His campaign is lackluster, and he does not seem to project either a message or confidence.
This is a sad election - where contenders are hyped by the media, who try to make celebrities of the candidates rather than give our country good, solid facts and information. They forecast without any concern for the country, and are only interested in being the media who "called it right." So in the end it is being run by the talking heads who push their favorites instead of just reporting. What a mess.
All the candidates are talking about is "change" - which is ridiculous. The fact that there is an election is, in itself, what will bring about a change, no matter who wins! That is a given. As it is every time there is no sitting president running. People who fall for that simplistic blabber about "change" arent't looking for quality, and wouldn't recognize it if it was there.
This field is just so mediocre (and even frightening), and no one has said anything of substance, IMHO. I don't feel any of them stirs up my confidence.
Well, I don't know any of them, either (in New Hampshire).
My wife had lots of Obama-intoxicated friends. They all hated Hillary.
My mother is a classic NY liberal. SHE didn't vote for Hillary in 2000. All of HER friends hated her.
That's why I say the Hillary vote is "hidden". Men and women who have normal relations with each other are unaware of it, until election day, and the polls miss it, as well.
It's a problem.
“It’s a problem.”
It’s hard for me to believe *wanting a woman to be president* would cause women to secretly go against their spouses wishes and vote for the Beast.
Wonder if they’re putting something in those hormone pills? (since it’s mostly the older women)
The polls said Obama. The Exit Polls said Obama. Extra ballots were needed because there was a shortage is SOME precincts.
If this were Florida or Ohio we would could be sure that this is a classic case of Rove election fraud. After all, how could those exit polls be so wrong.
But I don't think the media will read these tea leaves in quite the same way.
And the U button is perilously close to the i button on the keyboard :D
If this were Florida or Ohio we would could be sure that this is a classic case of Rove election fraud. After all, how could those exit polls be so wrong.
But I don't think the media will read these tea leaves in quite the same way.
You're absolutely correct.
One issue that will dog polls throughout this campaign season is what pollsters refer to as "social desirability bias" in polls. Especially with liberals, you get respondents lying to pollsters as they do not want to tell somebody that they are not in support of a minority or other "oppressed group." In this case, we have two people who, to the left, represent oppressed minorities. This will throw off the polls, but no pop poli-sci types will say so.
If the goal is to make a mediocre performance stunning, the polls before the vote must be disappointing.
Articles about Hillary running out of money, low poll results and falling, staffers floating resumes, crying on camera, rumors of her quitting, articles wondering what she’d do after she quit, taken together, makes even a two point loss look like an unbelievable comeback and evidence that she has what it takes. As for a two or three point win, it’s a MIRACLE! The stuff you see on TV is not random, you know.
I heard someone on TV last night going on about how this incredible, stuning victory proves that Hillary has the required experience...
“Anyway I’m glad she won. Obama is worse tan Hillary.”
Be careful what you wish for.
And I agree with you on that. My first reaction to the Clinton lead early on after hearing that Obama was up 5-8 points in the exit polling was exactly that - the voters are lying to the pollsters.
I suspect Hillary is very strong among the older, liberal, proto-feminist types. E.g., Gloria Steinem and friends.
“In this case, we have two people who, to the left, represent oppressed minorities.”
No, you have one person who represents two “oppressed” minority groups: Obama. Women are the majority, and they are not oppressed.
The White House and the Rockefellers want a Clinton vs. McCain election.
All they had to do to get this result in New Hampshire was throw the switch on the Diebold Machines and get LHS to do their bidding.
Hearing Dede Myers on MSNBC on primary day convinced me that evil was afoot to keep Mrs. Clinton in the race and on target for the desired goal of her Presidency. Disgusting.
The crocodile tears sure worked, didn’t they?
The question is not what you or I believe, or want to believe.
The question is, what do we learn from studying pre-election polls, actual election results, and demographics in the 2000 NY Senate race and the NH primary yesterday.
I know it's not a lot of data, but it is what it is.
What we learn is that polls undercall the Hillary vote, and they undercall it most in Republican districts among women.
I've lived in the northeast my whole life, and I hear all the time from FReepers who say, "our women aren't like that".
Maybe.
Sorry, I reject the "conspiracy among 15 different competitive polling outfits" theory.
“When all else fails, cry.”
It’s always worked for me. I’m not saying I can cry at will but it has gotten me out of a few tickets. I’m sure Hilary’s cracking voice and moist eyes were genuine, though.
Quite correct-which is precisely why Obama would be SO much easier to beat in November. Unfortunately-now it’s going to be the Clintons running ...again.
Chrissy Matthews said on Morning Joe a few minutes ago that it was the lying racist wing of the democrats that lied to pollsters when saying they supported Obama, but turned around and pulled the lever for Hill/Edwards.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.