Hillary Clinton Took 10% of the NH Vote Yesterday

D'oh!

Cross-posted from P&L.

You won’t see this reported in the mainstream media, but Hillary Clinton likely took an astounding 10% of the vote in New Hampshire’s 2012 Democratic Primary last night. Here are the election results from AP (via CSPAN). We know the “Write In” candidate was Hillary Clinton because there was a concerted effort to write her in, and because New Hampshire has never produced a write in candidate with a double digit percentage for either party’s primary with the exception of LBJ in ’68. This suggests New Hampshire Democrats, and Hillary Clinton supporters specifically a) aren’t over 2008, and b) wanted to send a powerful message to President Obama. Personally, I would love to see the exit polling on this one.

For your gloating pleasure, here are the results from the five New Hampshire Dem primaries prior to 2012:

1992

1996

2000 (Scroll down to New Hampshire on this one)

2004

2008

Wiki on Write-in Campaigns in presidential primaries.

Nowhere will you find write in numbers of this percentage or even close. Ralph Nader’s 2002 campaign comes closest with 1.82% of the vote. In fact, you have to go all the way back to 1968 and the write in votes that Lyndon B. Johnson received after he declared he would not run for the presidency to beat Hillary Clinton’s numbers here–he received 50% of the vote. I think everyone with an awareness of history can understand how odd that election was. Could 2012 be shaping up to deliver an equally odd election this year?

As I said on P&L’s Facebook Fan Page:

This does not bode well for Obama.

If we can extrapolate even half that to the general public across the nation, he losses the margin he had in 2008 and has to turn out his entire base and a significant portion of Independents to win. That’s not likely with the political climate as it is. Of course a third party candidate could throw a wrench in it (Looking at you AmericansElect Chairman, Wall-Street-junk-bond baron, and “former” Obama supporter Peter Ackerman).

What do you think? Bellwether for 2012, or just a meaningless outlier?

About Woke Lola

Bitch, please.
This entry was posted in 2012 Elections, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

49 Responses to Hillary Clinton Took 10% of the NH Vote Yesterday

  1. votermom says:

    Any idea when NH will certify the votes so we can see the write-in names?

  2. DeniseVB says:

    I think the 10% was the total for 13 write in candidates, but that’s still a stick in the eye for Obama. It’s really hard to find details for the NH Dem results. I posted a link downstairs with a little info…..

    • Lola-at-Large says:

      Traditionally write in campaigns in the NH primary have garnered in the .001% territory. Will check out your link.

  3. DeniseVB says:

    If you believe Wiki, they have the result details….

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Hampshire_Democratic_primary,_2012

    Sorry, no Hillary 😦

  4. DeniseVB says:

    Wiki details for GOP….

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Hampshire_Republican_primary,_2012

    Will still look for more reliable sources……..

  5. Anthony says:

    In New York, if you cast a write-in ballot and the candidate did NOT register as a write-in candidate, all votes will go to the candidate of that party.

    That means that any write-invotes for Hillary will disappear down the Obama vortex

    It is my understanding that each state has their own rules about this. Anybody know anything further?

  6. Lola-at-Large says:

    It gets worse for Obama. According to the Secretary of State in NH, they were saying they thought there would be 75,000 votes cast in the Dem primary, compared to 250,000 in the GOP. But less than 60,000 (59,644 with 99% reporting) turned out for Obama.

    http://www.sos.nh.gov/

    The GOP got quite a bit closer to their anticipated total with 248,220, a difference of less than 2,000 votes.

    So there is your enthusiasm gap quantified, at least in NH.

  7. Three Wickets says:

    There were 14 actual names on the NH Democratic ballot including Obama totaling 90% of the vote. Then there was 10% for “write-in”, presumably most if not all for Hillary. That’s a big number for someone who wasn’t running.

    • elliesmom says:

      The only reasonable conclusion one can come to if the Republicans stick with Mitt is that they want to lose the election.

      • r u reddy says:

        Why would Romney lose them the election? Some people see Romney as just a meaner richer version of Obama. He might be a sorta worse President, but not catastrophically worse.

        Some people (I don’t know how many) would view a candidate Romney as setting them free to vote against Obama, one way or another.

  8. yttik says:

    There has been some coverage of this, ironically mostly from right wing sites and Fox news:

    “….Now, though, a write-campaign for a lady whose name is familiar is also underway in New Hampshire, according to a TV segment this afternoon on “Your World with Cavuto” on Fox News…”

    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/01/10/write-in-campaign-for-hillary-underway-in-new-hampshire/

    Write-In Campaign for Clinton Underway in New Hampshire

    http://video.foxnews.com/v/1381692845001/write-in-campaign-for-clinton-underway-in-new-hampshire/

  9. Three Wickets says:

    I’m no Newt fan, but he’s right about Romney. Mitt could be worse than Kerry.

    • 1539days says:

      MSNBC has been talking about the idea that Romney is going to “kill” Newt because he is the only real competition. It’s an interesting proposition, but Newt is better at this than Mitt and he was dumb enough to wake the sleeping giant.

      Still, debate prowess doesn’t mean jack shit. McCain and Palin won their debates and Obama is the president. It’s all about money and Mr. Bain Capital has the most.

  10. kc says:

    The ‘bought and paid for media’ will not report this.. And the D’s will try to stiffle it. However, not all NH dems are in love with Bambi so maybe it will get out.

    This is what happens when you play scorched earth politics like the bots did–there are some things we don’t forget.

  11. Three Wickets says:

    So here’s the full 30 minute Newt attacks Mitt video documentary. Interesting to me most of all because it’s the new breed of campaign content motivated by the Citizens United decision.

  12. HELENK says:

    Got to admit the guy has nerve

    funny how everyone but the backtrack family is supposed to show past records.

    http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view/20120111obama_uncle_seeks_police_officers_driving_record/srvc=home%26position=4

  13. imusthavepie says:

    There was a pundit on the CNN panel last night who was trying to talk about the the Democratic enthusiasm gap in NH. James Carville pretty much shut him down by saying he was wrong!

  14. teresainpa says:

    Where do I find out about the rules in Pa? I would like to vote for Hillary but not if it going to register as a vote for Barry.

    • Lola-at-Large says:

      Teresa, according to the wiki, PA used to be the write in capitol when it came to presidential primaries. But apparently the laws have changed. According to this grass roots org (http://www.paballotaccess.org/), they are fighting for a fairer access to the ballot for candidates who do not belong to legacy parties (Dems and Reps). They say it’s a matter of chance whether your write in is counted. It WON’T count for Obama, but it may not count at all. Here’s what they have to say:

      The flip side of the ballot access coin is that when candidates are denied ballot access by Pennsylvania’s unequal ballot access laws, and then choose to run a write-in campaign rather than give up on the voters they represent, they face the added obstacle that some counties in Pennsylvania won’t count the write-in votes that are cast for them. This makes the effect of PA’s discriminatory ballot access laws even worse than it would otherwise be!

      There is a good chance your vote wasn’t counted if you voted for a write-in candidate. The likelihood of that happening depends on what county you live in and what candidate you wrote-in. Votes for more popular write-in candidates are more likely to be tabulated than candidates who only get a handful of votes. The law requires county boards of elections to tabulate votes and submit a certified tabulation of those votes to the Secretary of State. But the Bureau of Commissions, Elections, and Legislation (BCEL), which is the Department of State Division that handles this, has little ability to compel county election boards to count the write-ins. Some counties report a thorough breakdown with all write-in votes. Some counties report totals for popular candidates and combined total for all the other candidates. Some counties only report a combined total of all write-in votes for a particular office, without breaking out tallies for any particular candidates.  And a few counties don’t report write-in votes AT ALL!

      Choosing not to count write-in votes is another way in which the election process in Pennsylvania is structured to discriminate against voters having meaningful choices. If it were not bad enough that PA limits your choices in the voting booth, they often go the additional step of not counting your vote if you refuse to have your choices constrained to whom they deem ballot worthy.

      Personally, I’d rather throw my vote away than vote for Obama. Or Mittens, for that matter.

  15. Swannie says:

    I disagree, at least Mitt supports Israel .

  16. Some Hillary supporters on Facebook tried calling the NH Secretary of State’s office and kept getting busy signals. Someone finally did get through and was told that we’ll know tomorrow who all the write-in votes were for. I guess they’re processing them all by hand.

  17. Lola-at-Large says:

    Okay, we have an acknowledgment of the enthusiasm gap, finally, and from the Nation no less. http://www.thenation.com/blog/165602/new-hampshire-results-point-democratic-enthusiasm-gap

  18. Lola-at-Large says:

    That said, we have a problem. Here is the note I left on Still4Hill’s FB page:

    Hey, I need your help trying to figure this out. Something fishy is going with the NH votes. Here is the “certified” results page for the Dem primary, which supposedly lists all the write ins, and Hillary Clinton does not appear at all. http://www.sos.nh.gov/presprim2012/DemSummaryPres.htm

    (more in the next comment to thwart the spam filter)

    • Lola-at-Large says:

      (message continued)

      However, the numbers are decidedly suspicious, starting with the fact that when I add up all the write in votes, they total 6715, but according to this site (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2012/by_state/NH_Dem_0110.html?SITE=CSPANELN&SECTION=POLITICS) only 5908 write ins were cast.

      Also suspicious is the number of votes going to Ron Paul. He has never garnered this many write ins in a Dem primary in NH, and Politico is reporting that he is the top write in candidate.

      I don’t believe this data set is correct. I think there may be a deliberate cover up. What are your thoughts?

      • Lola-at-Large says:

        And here’s her response:

        I had a feeling we were going to see something like this. I also have noticed significant discrepancies in the vote totals. When I crunch the numbers I get completely different results. SO! HRC got not a single write-in? Or is she supposedly among the “scattered?” Sad to sad – but we need poll watchers here in the USA. In her first speech returning to DC after Chelsea’s wedding she spoke to young African leaders and told them (and us) to use USHAHIDI. We need to pronto learn to watch the polls, and the counts and to use crowd sourcing.

        • It’s not just Hillary who is missing from that list. There are NO other prominent Democrats or Independents anywhere to be found. No Al Gore, no Bernie Sanders, no Donald Trump, no Ralph Nader, no other names that one might expect a disaffected Democrat to write in. They’re all Republicans.

          The Ron Paul votes might be for real, I’ll give them that. The Occupy crowd likes him and those folks would probably prefer to write him in on the Dem ballot than face the social stigma of walking into a public polling place and requesting a Republican ballot. So in that context, it kind of makes sense. But the others??? OK, maybe a handful of people got mixed up and requested the wrong party’s ballot. A handful of others might have deliberately sought to make mischief. And every state has its stupid people who don’t know their butt from a hole in the ground. But under normal circumstances, all of these put together would not equal ten percent of the total vote!

        • Lola-at-Large says:

          That’s exactly right, Jen. We’re to believe that NH suddenly got the write in itch when they never had it before? NH has never produced this kind of write in margin (with the exception of LBJ), and when you look at previous years, this one really stands out. I’m currently doing research into the integrity of William Gardner, the NH SoS, looking for ties to Obama, or any of his many operatives/long time wealthy supporters. Something stinks to high heaven here, and I’m going to get to the bottom of it. Because I will not have one more woman’s accomplishments erased from history by this Misogynist-in-Chief.

          I don’t even trust Paul’s numbers, but I’m guessing he did take some, just not that much.

  19. There’s a Hillary supporter on FB who has been looking into the matter. She called the NH Secretary of State’s office again today and they told her they still haven’t finished counting the votes. I heard from a different source that NH either couldn’t or wouldn’t verify those numbers that are on the website. A couple of other Hillary supporters who are better at math than I am said the numbers on the NH website’s chart don’t jibe with the results that were on the CNN website on election night. According to CNN, Obama got 82 percent of the vote, but one FB friend who crunched the numbers on the chart said it only adds up to 73 percent. I don’t know why NH posted that chart if it isn’t complete/correct, but something is definitely off.

  20. r u reddy says:

    My feeling (just a feeling) is that Clinton looks at 2012 this way: Obama filled his toilet, now let him swim in it. I have trouble believing she wants run for President or anything else for a while yet. Certainly not in 2012.

    (That’s a real prediction which will either be truthified or falsified by events.)

Comments are closed.