Nathan's Blog

First NH votes in: Obama leads with 70% of the vote!

Nathan — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:14:32 EST

Okay, it's only tiny Dixville Notch, N.H., the town that votes at midnight on primary morning, in order to call itself "first in the nation" to vote in each presidential election. But with all seventeen (!) Dixville Notch votes counted, the Democratic primary currently stands at Obama 7, Edwards 2, Richardson 1, Clinton 0. (In related news, on the Republican side it's McCain 4, Romney 2, Giuliani 1.)

How does winning New Hampshire by 50 points sound to you?

Okay, I fearlessly predict that Obama's lead will shrink. But it would be pretty cool if Obama continued to collect as many votes as all of the Republicans put together!

Update: There's one other tiny New Hampshire hamlet that votes in the middle of the night, a town called Hart's Location. With those 13 Democratic votes added in, the election now stands at Obama 16, Clinton 3, Edwards 3, Richardson 1. So Obama's lead has actually grown from 50% to 56.5%--woo-hoo!

New Hampshire Polls: Big O has Mighty Mo....

Nathan — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 03:43:37 EST

I know that plenty of folks are opposed to poll-watching, because (theoretically) it takes our eye off the ball.

I understand the sentiment... but for the moment I say nuts to that, because the news out of New Hampshire is looking stunningly good for our guy--and it's the post-Iowa polls that show him with a big lead:

Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby (in a poll conducted January 4-6) has Obama leading by 10%:
Obama 39%, Clinton 29%, Edwards 19%, margin of error 3.4%.
American Research Group (ARG) (in a poll conducted January 5-6) has Obama leading by 11%:
Obama 39%, Clinton 28%, Edwards 22%, margin of error 4%.
CNN/WMUR/University of New Hampshire (in a poll conducted January 5-6) has Obama leading by 10%:
Obama 39%, Clinton 29%, Edwards 16%, margin of error 5%.
Gallup (in a poll conducted January 4-6) has Obama leading by 13%:
Obama 41%, Clinton 28%, Edwards 19%, margin of error 4%.
Rasmussen Reports (in a poll conducted January 4-5) has Obama leading by 12%:
Obama 39%, Clinton 27%, Edwards 18%, margin of error 3%.
McClatchy/NBC (in a poll conducted January 2-4, i.e., mostly before the late-January-3 news from Iowa) has Obama leading by 2%.:
Obama 33%, Clinton 31%, Edwards 17%, margin of error 5%.
(Then came Iowa!)

Looking good, huh?

Okay, now back to work!

(Update: I fixed two clerical errors in the Rasmussen item and added the Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll.)

Multiplicity of Minnesota Groups Here

Nathan — Mon, 05 Mar 2007 03:36:13 EST

Hello! Rank newcomer here; please excuse me if this question has been addressed before (or is othewise too cheeky).

Upon registering at this site this evening, I'm surprised at the number of state groups available. I count at least three that purport to be for the entire state of Minnesota, which is a bit confusing to this newbie. (As a Minneapolitan, I'm also a little thrown that there is both a Minneapolis group and an Uptown Minneapolis group.) Is there a good reason for having redundant systems like this?

Consolidating all of the statewide groups would make sense to me ... but of course there could be good reasons for the present arrangement that I'm not aware of. Or maybe it's just not easy to perform that kind of consolidation?

Any thoughts?