"Don't bet on an Iowa bounce in N.H."

[ccpup]

Over the last half-century, New Hampshire's famously independent first-in-the-nation primary voters have often followed their own path.

In 1980, former California Gov. Ronald Reagan won a two-to-one victory over George H.W. Bush here, despite Mr. Bush's earlier victory in Iowa. Eight years later, Mr. Bush, then vice president, won New Hampshire's Republican primary even though he had suffered a double-digit defeat at the hands of Sen. Bob Dole in Iowa.

In 2004, Sen. John F. Kerry of Massachusetts surged in New Hampshire after his unexpected Iowa win. But that surge followed the implosion of Vermont Gov. Howard Dean's campaign.

"Historically, there's not that much of a bounce between Iowa and New Hampshire," said Andrew E. Smith, an associate professor of political science at the University of New Hampshire at Durham. "There's some, but not much."

...

rest of this very interesting article here:

http://post-gazette.com/pg/08004/846657-176.stm

[Buzz Clik]

1. If you want to get your bets in -- hurry! The primary is in 4 days.

[Adelante]

2. New Hampshire is a completely different race

Very independent-minded voters who aren't necessarily influenced by what happens in Iowa or can be downright ornery. Obama will have to win from scratch all over again. He knows that.

[Colobo]

6. Of course who does.

[rox63]

3. NH is a very different environment than Iowa

Not nearly as many fundies as in Iowa. And a lot of independent-minded cranky old yankees.

[Itchinjim]

12. Fundies don't vote for Democrats.

And I don't know where people get the idea that Iowa is full of fundies. Only 11% of the total votes, Republican and Democrat, went to Huckabee who finished 4th overall. Not exactly what one would expect from a supposed fundamentalist state is it?

[papau]

4. History is big bounce in polls for 4 days then drop to little bounce in primary - but this time only

5 days means primary will be held at the top of Obama's bounce.

[ccpup]

7. what people forget

is that sandwiched between NH and SC is NV (home of the city with the largest population growth) on the 19th where Hillary has a 20 point lead. If Obama and Hillary are neck-and-neck in NH -- a reasonable expectation considering the Polls -- and then Hillary takes NV by a large margin, we could see pistols-at-dawn in SC.

[Sparkly]

5. IIRC, General Clark was in 2nd place in NH when Kerry won Iowa.

After Iowa, NH changed dramatically -- Dean fell from first to second, yes, but Edwards suddenly rose up to a strong 4th, and Kerry went from 3rd to 1st, as I recall.

That was definitely a "me too."

[brooklynite]

8. Yes, but...

NH polls had already started trending to Obama in the Democratic race and away from Mittens in the Republican race. The Iowa results should help enhance what's already occuring.

[ccpup]

10. operative word being "should"

because that would make sense, right? But this is New Hampshire where a solid majority of those polled have "strongly" made up their minds and are "extremely" unlikely to change them.

I don't know if an Iowa win -- and a bounce which may or may not (due to the truncated schedule this year) affect the race -- will be as strong for these voters as they may be for people elsewhere.

[Le Taz Hot]

9. I've said it before and I'll say it again,

a caucus is not a primary. Iowa SHOULD be taken with a grain of salt. Unfortunately, the MSM, being the useful idiots that they are, want to declare a "winner" as early as possible.

[GalleryGod]

11. You guys on Du better learn to "throw the old,dogeared, playbook out" this year.

If you watch a split screen of Hillary - Obama last night...


Yesterday vs. Tomorrow