94% of NH voters say what happens in Iowa won't impact their vote. Do you believe them?

[jefferson_dem]

Some interesting historical perspective (courtesy of Beeton at mydd):

CNN asked voters whether Iowa would impact their vote at all. While many voters may be as yet undecided, 94% of them insist that what happens in Iowa will have little effect on their ultimate decision. This flies in the face of reality, of course, as an ARG tracking poll out of NH taken just before Iowa in 2004 had New Hampshire polling as follows:

Dean 28
Clark 20
Kerry 19
Edwards 8

Eight days after Iowa's Kerry win, New Hampshire voted like so:

Kerry 38
Dean 26
Clark 13
Edwards 12

Just sayin'. It should be noted, however, that next year, there will be just 5 days for Iowa to impact New Hampshire, two of which are a weekend.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/12/19/112618/87

[wyldwolf]

1. I do this year

[AtomicKitten]

2. The field will start to collapse and then all bets are off.

[emilyg]

13. I'll never look at candy canes the same way. LOL

[Major Hogwash]

34. Hahahahahaha! I'm stealing that pic!

That is funnier than hell!

[AtomicKitten]

36. I think if you call it, it's not stealing.

It's borrowing! :)

[bunnies]

3. The media killed Dean in NH.

IMHO... that had way more to do with it than how Iowa turned out.

[loveangelc]

8. unfortunate or not, I believe the media will do the same to Hillary if she loses Iowa. n/t

[bunnies]

9. Im not sure..

I think as long as she doesnt do an enthusiastic "yyeaaahh" they wont be able to damage her as much as they did Dean.

[Drunken Irishman]

26. I disagree, if she doesn't win Iowa, don't expect a lot of positive press.

It's bullshit and I'll say that as someone who doesn't support Hillary. But they'll latch onto the idea she's beatable, ram it into the ground and within a couple days, people will be off her bandwagon.

[bunnies]

27. With our debate on the 5th though...

she'll get the chance to hit back at whatever bullshit they pull.

[Drunken Irishman]

28. She will, but it might not do much.

Dean went on a couple shows to try and repair his image after the media screwed him and it really didn't do anything.

[bunnies]

29. True.

It was 24/7 Dean Scream right up until our primary. Thinking about it still really pisses me off. I couldnt believe how many people swallowed what the MSM shoved down their throats. :mad:

I guess this is where the inevitability meme could really come back to hurt her. That would be the only thing I could think of that would make her more of a target than anybody else that doesnt win Iowa.

Honestly, I just cant want until the primary is over.

[Capn Sunshine]

45. Disagree. Hillary has very strong media connects

The ones covering the campaign however are already miffed at the campaign's inability to provide access; those will be the ones that shred her. We''ll see which wins out

[LakeSamish706]

4. I don't believe them, with only 5 days between Iowa and NH I think there will be carry over. n/t

[bunnies]

10. We have a debate in NH on the 5th though.

That could negate the Iowa effect.

[jefferson_dem]

15. I forgot about that. I wonder how far the field will be "winnowed" by that debate.

How many will be left standing? :shrug:

[bunnies]

17. Me too. I suspect they'll all stay in though...

if anything *because* we have that debate. I know that for a lot of casual voters, It'll be the first debate theyve even watched. Not to mention... we've never had a debate in the time between IA & NH. Something tells me it'll be a good one.

Thats why I put absolutely zero stock in any NH poll. That debate could change everything.

[IA_Seth]

5. As a Clark-04 supporter...

I sadly disagree with them. Clark's decision to skip Iowa, and thus miss out on the momentum he could have gained, sunk him. And I am still disappointed.

[jenmito]

22. Same here.

I remember him saying things would've been different if he had campaigned in Iowa. I believe (and wish) he would've won the whole thing if he decided to campaign there. But he had to choose and he chose NH.

[Renew Deal]

32. Me 3

Clark knows the mistake he made. Funny thing is Guiliani is making the same mistake. :hi:

[jenmito]

35. Yup...

I guess he wasn't watching the Dems.' race in '04 (in '03 really). Giuliani's an idiot anyway. :hi:

[Sparkly]

40. Me 4

I'm still pissed at New Hampshire.

[IndianaJones]

6. no. nt.

[FrenchieCat]

7. They don't caucus......

so each person who votes will do so based on various reasons. Some might vote influenced by Iowa results, others will not.

But we will know soon enough.

[emilyg]

11. Yes I do.

[maximusveritas]

12. Of course. Just like people say they aren't affected by ads

or endorsements, when we know they are. They just think it's weak to admit it. They want to make their own decision.

[rinsd]

14. Sometimes NH feels like a maverick though obviously not always

In 2000 Gore went from a 2 to 1 thrashing of Bradley in IA to a tight 4 pt win over him in NH. Same with McCain and Bush though McCain basically wrote off Iowa.

96 & 80 don't count because of incumbents (even though Kennedy ran against Carter, his NH results are tainted by his prox) & 92 was uncontested. Though in 92 they took a chance on a young then scandal plagued candidate.

In 1988, Dukakis finished 3rd in IA and took 1st in NH.

In 1984, Hart made his big splash in NH.

[graywarrior]

16. Yep. I lived in NH for years. They don't let nothin' sway their opinions or choices.

[mmonk]

18. No.

Some will move towards trends. Everybody always claims nothing affects their decisions.

[KansDem]

19. NPR went to Iowa earlier this week for another of its "small town cafe" interviews.

NPR seems to do this every election: go to small-town America and ask customers in some diner about their politics. And once again, we heard about the importance of gun ownership and bringing God back into public life.

I heard the same crap eight years ago, and we saw what happened since...

I know this thread is about New Hampshire, but I just wanted to relate this story about Iowa.

[DURHAM D]

20. Yes n/t

[zanne]

21. NH IS different!

You can never tell what's going to happen here. And we don't think of Iowa as being like-minded. We've always been an independent bunch, and that's not about to change. Approximately 40% of NH voters are registered as Independents.

[jefferson_dem]

25. The open-primary system serves up the ultimate wild-card, zanne.

Seeing McCain get any momentum at all troubles me...as an Obama supporter. I hate to root for Mitt in Iowa but, if he wins, the snowball will be rolling pretty fast into NH, and any glimmer of hope among would-be McCain supporters may be all but dashed.

I didn't think I could dislike Lieberman any more..>! :mad:

[MadBadger]

30. See I dont think McCain matters

McCain can take the pro-war independents, and Obama can take the anti war ones.

[zanne]

37. Mitt is the Republican for NH....

Mitt, Mitt, Mitt. That's all I hear. Giuliani is poison, and we've already done the McCain thing. Republicans are very disappointed in him now. Though I think there's an outside chance that Ron Paul will get it--you never know. Most of the Independents are just fed up with the Republican party as a whole. They've been fooled twice--they're pissed.

[Sparkly]

38. If NH is independent, why the tendency to "me too" after Iowa? nt

[zanne]

43. We don't have a habit of "me-too ing" after Iowa.

Do a couple of primaries erase about 50 other primaries? We usually make it a point to vote differently from Iowa.

[dmallind]

23. Sure but I don;t care either

When the little peewee states are done with their power trip it really matters only whether the super-duper Tuesday states let it influence them or not. The handful of EC votes or delegate counts from IA NH etc will make no difference in the end nine times out of ten - it's whether they can drag CA and NY and IL etc with them.

[zanne]

39. Um...But doesn't NH have a larger population than Nebraska?

A state can be "peewee", like Massachusetts, for example, yet have more influence than some large states with a sparse population.

[dmallind]

41. Probably sounded more dismissive than I meant it to be

And yes NE is a peewee state too, in the context that I meant it. The 4 and 5 and 8 EV states don't do a whole lot to determine outcomes most often, especially in primaries, and even the early states' influence is much overblown IMO. Sometimes IA and NH winners go on to cruise, sometimes they don't. When they do it's usually because they timed their peak appropriately and had shrewd plans to grow support in other states anyway. I don't think a win in IA or NH etc is going to make a poor campaign into a winner just because people in other states magically decide they want to vote the same way. Again I know sometimes second tier guys who show well in early states pull ahead later, but we should be careful of post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacies here, and obviously it's not a consistent effect anyway.

Oh and as a final note I do live in NY now, which is not peewee in the same sense, but again I didn't mean the peewee comment to be insulting or personalized anyway - just a reflection of real EV/delegate impact.

[zanne]

42. Thank you, dmallind.

Thanks for explaining that to me. I don't have a clue what will happen this year. This is a different animal; the country is in an angry, ungenerous mood. Anyway, I appreciate the clarification.

[BeyondGeography]

24. No

People are full of shit. I know because I'm one of them.

[Renew Deal]

31. Bullshit

They say that, but we all know it's not true.

[Major Hogwash]

33. Iowa always gives a 10 point bounce to the caucus winner in New Hampshire's primary.

Sometimes it isn't enough to win the NH primary, but it always has an effect.

There is a a direct positive coorelation between the candidates in both states when viewing the winners in each state.

Just like there is a direct positive coorelation between the two states of Michigan and Wisconsin, two other states that mirror each other's voting preferences.

[harun]

44. I believe 6% of them (n/t)