17 replies to this topic

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

It is now less than ten hours until the first votes will be cast in the New Hampshire primary. Here's where things stand, poll-wise:

 

Democrats

Sanders 54%

Clinton 40%

 

Republicans

Trump 31%

Rubio 15%

Cruz 13%

Kasich 11%

Bush 10%

 

These numbers are based on the most recent CNN poll of polls. Unfortunately they do not reflect the impact of Saturday night's Republican debate, and specifically Rubio's apparent self-destruction. Since most polls (and all good polls) are conducted over several days, we will not see a poll conducted entirely after the debate before the voting starts. There might be some numbers late tonight and early tomorrow that could shed some light, and the campaigns themselves have post-debate polling, but we the people won't know what's actually happening until it happens. And that makes it kind of exciting.

 

Here are my predictions:

• Sanders is going to beat Clinton. I don't think anyone will be too surprised to see me say that. The question will be the margin. The aggregate poll numbers above do not necessarily convey the seriousness of Hillary Clinton's situation. In some recent individual polls, Clinton has been as much as 30 points behind. There is no chance of her winning in the Granite State; the best that she can hope for is to narrow the margin and try to claim a moral victory. If she can close the gap to single digits, i.e. 9 points or less, she would have a good case for being the second Clinton Comeback Kid. The aggregate numbers, which only have her 16 points down, suggest that this might be possible. But my instinct is to say that it's not going to happen. Bernie sanders' supporters are fired up; they're going to come out in droves. Hillary's supporters are older, and turnout might be suppressed by the weather (we are currently being blizzarded on here in the Northeast; I'm on my second snow day in a row — yay four-day weekends!). I think Bernie is going to trounce her by 20 points or so.
• Trump is going to win, but he is going to underperform his poll numbers. Partly this will be because of the weather (his supporters tend to be older, like Clinton's), and partly it will be for the same reason he underperformed his Iowa polls: voters lost their nerve at the last minute. If electability means something to you, Donald Trump is probably not your candidate. And New Hampshire voters are nothing if not pragmatic. I predict that Trump's margin is going to be smaller than anticipated, around 25%. The runner-up will not be far behind him, probably within 5 points. As to who that runner-up will be...
• I think Kasich or Bush are going to finish 2nd in New Hampshire. My rationale: Rubio looked set to become the mainstream candidate and consolidate the moderate and "electability" vote. But his terrible, horrible, no good, very bad debate performance probably scuttled that. His support was only just beginning to take form, and it was never deep. A lot of his potential voters will be spooked. I don't think Chris Christie will be the beneficiary of this, however, despite his being the instrument of Rubio's destruction. He is too bombastic, too crass, too Trump-like. New Hampshire voters like a more genteel candidate. Kasich and Bush have also worked the state HARD, and Bush, at least, is reputed to have a stellar on-the-ground operation to get out his vote.
  
  I think Kasich and Bush are going to pick up Rubio's refugees, Trump supporters who suddenly get cold feet, and last-minute voters (who historically tend to go for moderates). The only question is which one? I'm tempted to say Kasich, because he has really put in the time and the legwork, and the people of New Hampshire seem to like him. But I think it's going to be Bush. He had a couple of strong moments in the last debate, specifically the exchange with Trump over eminent domain. His name and family are well known here. And his organization is top notch. I think he's going to turn out the people he needs to turn out, and surprise the political watchers.
• Whoever doesn't come in second will still have a pretty good night at third. If this is Bush, look for it to be a Vitamin B shot to his campaign. It will ease the minds of worried donors, for sure, and give him some momentum going into South Carolina. If it's Kasich it will do some of the same things, but to a lesser degree. Frankly, even if Kasich comes in second I don't think his campaign has the legs to take advantage of it. He just doesn't have the money, and even a second place finish in New Hampshire would probably not give him enough of a boost to go all the way. 
• The losers are going to be Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio. Cruz could still place or finish a strong fourth. Evangelical voters are a much smaller proportion of the electorate in New Hampshire, but they do exist and they are highly motivated. Bad weather will not impede them. Cruz's numbers had been flat or declining in NH prior to Saturday night's debate, when he was hammered over his campaign's dirty tactics in Iowa. If he places third he will have some justification, at least in his own mind, to go on. I haven't seen recent numbers from South Carolina, but presumably it is friendly territory for a guy like Cruz. My instinct, though, is that he will sink to fourth. Rubio might still have enough residual support and organization to hang on to third, but it's really hard to say. Saturday night was pretty disastrous. I suspect that it amounts to the death knell of his campaign, if not his political career (he is not running for reelection to the Senate). I bet he falls out of the top tier altogether and ends up as fifth, behind Cruz

Jorost's final predictions for the New Hampshire GOP primary:

 

25% Trump

20% Bush

18% Kasich

13% Cruz

10% Rubio

8% Christie

4% Carson

1% Fiorina

[KiWi]

1% Fiorina - ugh.

[Allant]

Do you think anyone will drop out after this? 

[HordeLorde]

I think Carson and Fiorina will drop out...and maybe even Christie.

Even if Bernie wins NH by a large margin, i think he will still have a tough go in south carolina. The Democratic race for the white house seems like its going to go back and forth a lot, with a few more "too-close-to-call" states thrown in there aas well. It may come down all the way to the Democratic Convention.

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

The problem for Bernie is that the calendar becomes very friendly to Hillary Clinton. Even if he wins big in New Hampshire, the best he can hope for in South Carolina is to close the gap somewhat. 

[Redezra]

Come oooon Clinton magically pulling it out of the bag.

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

Nope.

 

Sanders delivered unto the Lady Clinton an ass-whupping for the ages, 60-38%. Nothing like a 22-point margin to make the inevitable candidate suddenly not feel so inevitable. This is essentially what I predicted in the original post, so I can't say I'm surprised. But it's still pretty satisfying to watch. Also I really, really like being right.

 

Meanwhile, on the Republican side, the final results were:

 

Trump 35%

Kasich 16%

Cruz 11.7%

Bush 11%

Rubio 10.6%

Christie 7.4%

Fiorina 4.1%

Carson 2.3%

 

The media have been quick to call this a Trump landslide, and it is an undoubtedly impressive win. But the observer would do well to note that 65% of Republican primary voters voted against Donald Trump. His support, at least so far, seems to have a ceiling, and maybe this is it. And already the field narrows against him. Christie and Fiorina have announced that they are out. Carson insists he's staying in, but he's become nothing more than a novelty candidate; he has no serious chance of getting the nomination. Rubio is in a tailspin, his numbers — and fundraising — plummeting in the wake of his dismal debate performance. Only Kasich and Bush are on the rise.

 

In terms of my predictions, above, I guess I would say that in some ways I was close, but in others I was way off. As far as the finishing order, I was close. Real close. I said it would be Trump>Bush>Kasich>Cruz>Rubio, and the final results were Trump>Kasich>Cruz>Bush>Rubio. But on many of the salient points I was at or near the mark. I thought Kasich and Bush would be the beneficiaries of Rubio's fall, and it looks like that's what happened. I overestimated how much of that support would go to Bush, neglecting to consider the personal animosity between these men. And I even conceded that Kasich could conceivably come ion second. I must say I am surprised it actually happened, but that's where the part about my being way off comes in...

 

I assumed, based on his Iowa results, that Donald Trump would underperform his polls. In fact he overperformed them. I thought he'd get about 25% of the vote, and he came away with 35%. I was a little closer with second place, which I thought would be around 20%, and was in fact 16%. But still. Hard to deny that Trump had a yuge night. YUGE.

 

Now the big question is where do Christie's voters (and, to a lesser extent, Fiorina's voters) go? That might depend on what Christie does. If he endorses someone, a lot of his supporters (not to mention voter lists) will go to that person. I have a feeling that if he were going to endorse someone, it would be Bush. Christie's a pragmatist; he knows better than to bet against a Bush. On the other hand, Christie's more bombastic style might be a better fit for Trump, so you've got to assume at least some of Christie's voters would gravitate to the Donald. Fiorina's voters, on the other hand, would likely be repulsed by Trump. Being that there is no other business-oriented outsider left in the race, where do Carly's supporters go? Bush? And what about Kasich?

*rubs his hands together with glee*

So much left to play...

[KiWi]

At 2.3% Carly doesn't "have" voters. She's irrelevant. Hasn't even been mentioned to be on the ground/in any debates in months. If I'm wrong, that's fine. I don't follow this in too much detail, but the fact that I can't hear her mentioned on Fox or CNN when I do tune in/the fact that I dislike her, is far and beyond enough reason to completely write her off.

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

When you have three candidates within a point of one another, 2.3% matters.

[rotty]

Come on Kasich, you can do it  

Hillary received what, 9 delegates in total, so New Hampshire wasnt to bad for her.

[Redezra]

Whens the next one where's the next one?

[King Biscuit]

2-20

Nevada [D]

South Carolina [R]

[KiWi]

When you have three candidates within a point of one another, 2.3% matters.

My point, more so, is they aren't a base or group for her. Just people who ended up voting for her. 2.3% matters, but she doesn't have those people locked down. A single debate swings things as much as 2.3%. Moving one state to the next will easily give you differences of 2.3%. It's an amount that can be written off, and considered under so many other factors.

The weather on the day of the primary affects the final results more than whomever Carly endorses, whoever takes over her 'niche' if it could even be said she occupied one*.

*I'll give that she had the "real business women" niche, but that dried up. Trump is the closest thing now, and his personality defines his camp gain and his support more than any niche.

[the rebel]

But the observer would do well to note that 65% of Republican primary voters voted against Donald Trump. His support, at least so far, seems to have a ceiling, and maybe this is it.

The observer would note that the Republicans have 8 candidates to vote for, which doesn't necessarily mean 65% were against him, it just means he wasn't their first choice.

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

The data suggest that Trump is not anyone's second choice. People seem to either love him or hate him. While some of his supporters would no doubt migrate to other candidates if Trump were not in the race, many would simply not vote at all. We will see whether this trend continues. The conventional wisdom has it that Trump will hit a ceiling of around 40%, but Trump has defied conventional wisdom so far.

 

KiWi: On what are you basing your suppositions about Carly Fiorina's supporters? Generally when a candidate gets down to low single digits the only people left are the true believers.

[the rebel]

Data? Why have polls been made on people having a first, second and or third choice? Or is that just some fluff you plucked from the sky?

[Ordo]

Data? Why have polls been made on people having a first, second and or third choice? Or is that just some fluff you plucked from the sky?

Facts don't matter here, its politics. 

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

Asking about second choices is pretty standard in primary polling.