So, About New Hampshire

Biggest thing for me about it is that 42,000 fewer people participated in the Democrat primary than in 2008; the returns aren’t 100% yet, but my calculation is that about 245,000 people voted in the Democrat primary last night, in 2008 it was 287,000. That is a 15% decline – rather large. What is shows that the Democrats are not enthused about 2016 – and the Democrats need at least most of 2008’s enthusiasm to carry their nominee – still almost certain to be Hillary – over the finish line. Meanwhile, over on the GOP side, a bit more than 280,000 people participated, while in 2012 it was 248,000 – showing GOP enthusiasm is up. If this sort of turnout prevails over the primaries (and I suspect it will), then it will demonstrate that the Democrats are in deep trouble.

From what I’ve seen, Sanders didn’t just beat Hillary, he crushed her. But, will it matter? Next up is South Carolina where the Democrat electorate is heavily African-American and African-Americans have been Clinton loyalists since 1992 – with the exception of 2008. But was 2008 merely a reflection of running against Obama, or an indication that African-American loyalty to the Clinton’s isn’t as deep as people think? We’ll find out in South Carolina – if Sanders can peel away even 35% of the African-American primary vote from Hillary, then we might not have Hillary as the Democrat nominee. And that, actually, worries me a bit. I know that the official line is that Hillary is impervious but I’m starting to suspect she’s a loser – against any GOPer. Sanders, the Socialist, is allegedly the George McGovern of 2016…but with his populist, anti-Establishment credibility, he might actually be harder to beat, especially if the GOP nominates someone like Jeb or Kasich.

On the GOP side, the only remarkable thing for me was Cruz coming in strong third – he spent little time or resources in New Hampshire and did very well. Meanwhile, Jeb poured in resources and came in fourth. It is time for Jeb to pack it in – though I suspect he’ll hang around until Florida. Rubio had a bad night – fifth place behind Jeb, of all things. Some say it was the debate and maybe that did it; I don’t really know. Maybe 2016 just isn’t Rubio’s year. Right now, I think it shapes up as a battle between Cruz and Trump, with a slight chance that Rubio rebounds as the Great Establishment Hope.

Get ready for a strange political year…

Advertisements

24 thoughts on “So, About New Hampshire

  1. Shawny Lee February 10, 2016 / 4:07 pm

    Hillary didn’t lose to Sanders. The popular vote was a landslide for Sanders, but she won (or bought) more super delegate votes. Yes, Virginia, that’s just how screwed up this election system is.

    • M. Noonan February 10, 2016 / 4:17 pm

      Yeah, the #FeelTheBern people gotta be ticked at that – Sanders wins by 55,000 votes but Hillary winds up with 15 delegates to Sanders’ 13!

      • Shawny Lee February 10, 2016 / 6:49 pm

        Hell yes! Sanders group needs to be checking bank accounts of super delegates in NH and double sided coins in Iowa (or bank accounts of whomever was flipping them). There oughta be a law!! (oh but even if there were of course it would not apply to Hillary). The Democrat voters in New Hampshire have been totally disenfranchised by 15 people designated as “super delegates”? Heads need to roll on this disgraceful act. ……end of rant.

      • Amazona February 10, 2016 / 7:49 pm

        Shawny, ahem…..IT’S DEMOCRATS ! The same thing happened in 2000 when Hillary pulled in her “superdelegates” to try to fight off the Obama surge. This is nothing new. I seem to remember that some of her bought-and-paid-for “superdelegates” ended up voting for Obama, but I wasn’t paying that much attention to the swamp rats rolling around in the muck over there in DemLand. The thing is, it has happened before, it can’t surprise anyone, and if you think the Dems have any interest in cleaning out their own sewer you might want to get back to that Nigerian prince who keeps emailing you.

        What I think is so funny is that there is a Dem whining about voter fraud. Oh me, oh my, what a horrible thing ! OK, it’s just playing the game when Dems steal elections from Republicans, but they aren’t supposed to do it to each other, are they? Something about honor among thieves?

      • M. Noonan February 10, 2016 / 8:09 pm

        It suddenly occurred to me today that if the Superdelegates hadn’t abandoned Hillary in 2008, then she would have been the nominee (the bottom line is that Hillary actually won more votes than Obama did in the primaries…but the Superdelegates simply could not see themselves voting against the first credible African-American candidate for President)…and she probably would have won in 2008, given the overall political climate, and probably would have been re-elected in 2012. Now, whom would she likely have taken on as her VP? Obama, of course…which means that right now we’d be, indeed, having a coronation in the Democrat primary, of Obama…who would stand a remarkably good chance of winning this November because he’d still be “new”…but, the Democrats ditched Hillary in 2008 and so she’ll probably get the nod this time around…and go down in flames in 2016.

  2. Retired Spook February 10, 2016 / 4:17 pm

    Excellent video clip from Cruz.

    • M. Noonan February 10, 2016 / 4:19 pm

      That is the way for Cruz to carry it to victory, supposing he can figure out some way to stop Trump…which does look difficult. Cruz will do well in the “SEC Primary” down South…but Trump is still likely to clean up in places like California and New York.

  3. Retired Spook February 10, 2016 / 4:49 pm

    NBA coach’s reaction to NH primary results is PRICELESS!

  4. Shawny Lee February 10, 2016 / 7:02 pm

    O/T but important

    [b]Still Report #596 – ISIS Developing Plague Bio Weapon[/b]

    • Amazona February 10, 2016 / 7:39 pm

      I do not agree that Obama is doing nothing about the threats posed by ISIS. He is funding those threats, with our money.

      When I first heard about Saddam’s efforts to weaponize smallpox, coming up with a fantastically rapid-spreading virulent strain resistant to all antibiotics, I realized that a handful of martyrs around the world could infect themselves at the same time and fly into and out of major international airports, infecting thousands who would then get on other planes and carry the disease into every corner of the world except a few isolated parts of remote areas. The goal of creating so much death and misery and destruction to hasten the return of the 12th Imam would mean that there would be no concern about taking out Iran and other Middle Eastern nations as well.

      First Bush was so focused on getting “consensus” and agreement, over and over again, on invading Iraq that he let thousands of truckloads of WMD cross into Syria in the year it took him to put together what he foolishly thought would be a bulletproof defense against Democrat attacks on him for deciding to invade. They agreed to it, they signed off on it, and then they turned on him as if they had fought him tooth and nail, and in the meantime vast stores of deadly material were safely tucked away in Syria and wherever else they went from there..

      Then Obama came in and gave the green light to Islamic terrorism, finally going so far as to make sure Iran gets a hundred billion dollars or so to fund their attacks on us. How do we know they won’t use this money to build nukes and further develop biological and chemical weapons? Because they promised they wouldn’t !

  5. Amazona February 10, 2016 / 7:26 pm

    Someone, it might be Bill Kristol, has been touting a Trump/Kasich ticket. Sometimes I think we ought to skip the window dressing and just have a Trump/Sanders ticket.

    I haven’t given up on Cruz, and the more the media claim he is not really in the running and the more they tell us how far ahead Trump is, the more I think the media—-that is, the Left—–want Trump.

    We had a major hissy fit here not too long ago when I pointed out SOME of the things the Dems will hurl at him if he is the nominee, when i was taken to task for doing the Left’s dirty work for them by “cannibalizing” the Republican hopefuls. The argument then was that I shouldn’t point out the defects of a potential nominee until he IS the nominee. I say that is way too late, because by that time we are stuck with him, and if we nominate him without knowing what is lying in wait then we are so stupid we pretty much deserve what we get. Which would be, in my mind, a disaster.

    Seriously—look at the Complicit Agenda Media coverage of Trump. Do you ever see any comments on his multiple business failures, his federal investigations, etc? No, because the CAM do not want us to look too closely at him. They want, they desperately want, us to be ignorant of the vast piles of dirt lying there waiting to be hurled at him by the same media that are now fawning over him and declaring him the winner, They will turn on him in a heartbeat, and they will savage him with the very real and ugly truths about him they are now pretending not to notice.

    I think Cruz placing third in such a Left-leaning state, without putting too much into campaigning there, as more significant that a Leftist Trump flaunting a brand new and not very convincing conservative ball cap winning in a state where even most of the “conservatives” lean toward the Left.

  6. Retired Spook February 11, 2016 / 10:30 am

    BREAKING NEWS: global financial markets in turmoil. Oil plunges below $26/barrel, while gold climbs $50/oz., capping off $200 rise in last 60 days. Keep an eye on the markets today.

    • Amazona February 11, 2016 / 11:02 am

      Oil got up above $30.00, briefly, and then started down again. I have seen predictions it could hit $10.00 a barrel. Oil and gas exploration and extraction were pretty much all that kept the nation from plummeting ever farther into economic misery, and now that that industry is suffering I don’t know what can take its place. Obama is talking about a $10.00 a barrel tax on oil. I guess trying to destroy the coal industry was not enough to satisfy him, in his attacks on the American economy.

      What we really need now is a president who wants “….the government to pay for everything…” Bernie, Donald, the only real difference is the hair when it comes to growing government and developing the Dependent Class. Donald is a billionaire, Bernie wants to tax billionaires, but otherwise they are way too similar for my taste.

      Speaking of Donald—he has evidently decided that China is unaware of the problems posed by North Korea, so he is going to school them and “get them to take out” Kim Jung Un. No doubt the Chinese will be grateful to have the United States (1) educate them on world affairs and (2) tell them what to do. I wonder if Donald will “get” China to do his bidding before or after he “gets” Mexico to build a border wall.

      • M. Noonan February 11, 2016 / 10:41 pm

        On the plus side, Trump is the first politician I’ve seen who identified the source of the North Korean Problem – China. China likes having a small, lunatic ally to play merry hob with South Korea, Japan and the United States. Now, I doubt much that Trump will be able to get much movement on China about NK, but at least he can see who is pulling the puppet strings in Pyongyang.

      • Amazona February 12, 2016 / 12:09 pm

        If Trump is actually the guy who has finally identified the relationship between China and North Korea (which, by the way, I seriously doubt, as it has been obvious for quite a long time even to those of us out here in Flyover Country and been the subject of many commentary articles over the years) then how did he get it so wrong?

        You are saying China is behind North Korea’s antics, and Trump is saying that he will “get” China to take out North Korea’s leader. OK–walk through that with me. What could be accomplished by taking out North Korea’s leader? If it would weaken North Korea, why would China agree to do this? if in fact China has created today’s North Korea to use as a surrogate against, as you say, Japan and the United States, then why on earth would China agree to move against its own long-term planning and self interest?

        What magical powers would a President Trump have to be able to bend other nation’s leaders to his will?

        It’s just more Magical Thinking, with more ego in play and more fantasy of having super powers due to being, well, just so damned special. All these years we have decried this trait in Obama and now all of a sudden lemmings are surging toward electing another one, one with an ego on steroids.

        We need to get a grip on reality. When the United States has been seen as a superpower, it was because the NATION was strong. The country had a powerful and well trained military and a good enough economy to support extended military action. Now we seem to be leaning toward being a nation with a weak and ineffective military staffed by PC Leftists more interested in “diversity” than strength and really worried about looking too strong to the rest of the world, and an economy so anemic we can’t even support our domestic programs much less fund extensive overseas operations, so now we want to settle for convincing the world that OUR PRESIDENT is the source of our strength.

        I mean, just look at him! He is ANGRY. He is SCOLDING people he thinks are doing wrong things. He is SAYING THE RIGHT THINGS, appealing to his demographic of people who have been angry and resentful for a long time, and promising to fix what has ticked them off for so long. And by the sheer power of his personality, of his awesome wonderfulness, HE will accomplish what his demographic wants him to accomplish–without Congress, without the support and approval of half the country, without a foundation of a strong economy or a strong military, just because dammit he is who he is. Lower the oceans, build a wall, pull strings to get China to unman its own puppet antagonist, scoop 11 million people or so up without violence and ship them (somehow) to some other place (even if the governments of those other places don’t want them and won’t accept them), fundamentally transform an entire nation, MAKE DEALS, foment racial discord, whatever. It is all about the man, not the country.

        Obama, Trump, whatever. Same playbook, same demagogue appeal to the same kinds of seething angers and resentments, same preening statements of personal power able to solve the problems that tick that demographic off, same dependence on personal superiority.

      • M. Noonan February 12, 2016 / 11:20 pm

        Oh, Trump won’t be able to get China to move on NK – and for all I know, he figured it out, as it were, by accident…but NK exists because it suits Chinese interests that it should exist. An agreement could be easily reached to oust the NK regime, China agreeing, and re-unify the nation under SK rule…with a proviso, of course, that no Korean or other military forces could be within, say, 50 miles of the Yalu. It would work to China’s economic benefit first because SK would have to spend a bundle rebuilding NK and, second, because the eventual economic revival of NK would just provide a vast, new market right next door in a nation which doesn’t dare get too offensive against Chinese wishes.

        But they don’t do it – why? Even as far as tyrants go, the Chinese leadership must be disgusted with the NK leadership. It can’t be due to socialist solidarity. So, what it is?

        Because it is useful for China to have there a place which can instantly become an open wound for the United States and Japan should China ever need – or just desire – to move against Taiwan.

      • Bob Eisenhower February 12, 2016 / 4:16 pm

        The long history of China and Korea has always been paternalistic. Korea has always been a satellite of China, for centuries back.

        I’m sure China would be happier than any other nation were North Korea to oust the insane dynasty that has run the place since WWII. They are saddled defending that crazy from the rest of the world, like a crazy nephew in the basement.

        Trump is right, that the problem with North Korea is China protecting it, but he is wrong about the reason.

      • M. Noonan February 12, 2016 / 11:21 pm

        See my last to Amazona – NK is just too useful for China in a geo-political sense.

      • Amazona February 13, 2016 / 11:23 am

        Yet no doubt some from the Jerry Springer demographic will vote, or at least want to vote, for the guy who tells it like it is and has the guts to say what no one else will say because they think that somehow this bloated self-styled Superman WILL “get” China to get rid of Kim Jong Un.

        Yeah, we really need yet another petulant egomaniac in the White House, put there by people who think he has some magical powers just because, well, just because he IS who he IS.

  7. Retired Spook February 11, 2016 / 3:24 pm

    Here’s a sign of the times. I can’t imagine PAYING the bank to watch your money. Seriously upside down.

    • M. Noonan February 11, 2016 / 10:42 pm

      Heard that Yellen is apparently willing to pay banks to borrow money, as well…as you and I have been saying for years, we’ll see how this goes…but they can’t keep the ball in the air forever.

      • Retired Spook February 11, 2016 / 11:42 pm

        They’ve kept it in the air about 4 or 5 years longer than I thought was possible. The down side is that, having postponed the inevitable for so long, the crash is going to be just that much harder and deeper, and the FED has no arrows left. Actually, with what I believe is coming, the FED will probably end up being a minor player. Like you say — we’ll see how it goes. At least I don’t have to worry about losing my job.

      • Amazona February 12, 2016 / 12:16 pm

        Well, they could relax some of those strangling regulations that keep banks from LOANING money.

        A bank doesn’t make money by having people make deposits and then paying those people interest on the money they have deposited. Banks make money by lending that money to other people, who pay more interest TO the bank than the bank is paying to its depositors. It’s a concept that is clearly not grasped by the people running the country—that more money has to come in than what goes out.

        The Fed, and our Congress, are so deeply invested in regulating commerce that they can’t force themselves to give up some of the control they have been exerting, so smaller banks simply can’t loan out the money people have deposited. And their brilliant idea is to charge people for having their money in the banks. Somehow that makes more sense to them than simply letting the banks do what has kept banks profitable for centuries.

Comments are closed.