Jeez. AP called New Hampshire for both Trump and Biden about one minute after the polls closed? That's gotta be a new record. The exits must have been a tidal wave.
34 thoughts on “Trump and Biden win New Hampshire”
Comments are closed.
Cats, charts, and politics
The stories were filed several days ago. Now would you PLEASE be excited as required? A LOT of effort (and money) has gone into exciting you, and the shareholders are expecting an appropriate return. Thank you.
"The exits must have been a tidal wave." Does not appear that way. But maybe the rump heavy regions haven't reported.
Exist polls aren't all districts.
Exit, not exist
He tried to overthrow the government. They still support him.
BorderBidenOldWelfareWokeBorderNancyHillaryKamalaBorder
MuslimsWelfareBidenOldInflationBorderWelfareCrimeDrugs
BigGummintBorderBidenOldKamalaNancyAbortionsWokeBorder
Nah. Haley's going back and forth between 9-10 points down. The last Suffolk University poll from this morning, said that Trump had increased his lead to 22%.
There is a lot of goofball punditry suggesting she needs to win New Hampshire. That's just nonsense. She needs to shrink the gap to single-digit or near-single-digit, showing voters that she's gaining momentum. When it looks like she's competitive, people will stop acting like automatons supporting Dear Leader.
" people will stop acting like automatons supporting Dear Leader."
Nothing in evidence supports this contention. The Trump cult is going strong, and I don't see anything besides his death impeding his nomination as the GOP candidate.
His supporters are not homogenous. At least one-third look the other way while supporting him, if only because he sucks all the air out of the GOP room and they're dyed in the wool Republicans who must support the party.
all true. but none of that, and nothing else i've seen, indicates any signs the party will will break trump's hold on the voters, the politicians or the levers of power.
Voting for another Republican isn’t undermining the Party. They aren’t just voting for TFG, they are his devoted worshippers.
How do Republicans divide up the delegates for the nomination?
If I recall from 2016, Iowa didn't have that figured out for a month or so.
If I recall correctly, it's proportional for NH and maybe one more round, then it's plurality leader takes all. These next rounds are in much more MAGA states (hard to find a less MAGA one than NH anyway). And I've just read that Rs have a lot of "superdelegates" who'll do what Ronna Romney tells them to at the convention.
tldr: the fork was stuck in everybody not named trump long before Iowa.
The 2016 Iowa thing, iirc, was among the Ds-- a colossal screwup because they were using a new tablet-based system that they hadn't bothered to test and they had no paper to fall back on so it turned out to be nothing more than an elaborate social evening.
That fiasco was the result of Shadow Inc.'s total dependence on a non-load-tested app/server that failed almost immediately. To make matters worse, there was no reliable backup, like emailing CSV files to headquarters. After wards, Gerard Niemira-(founder of Shadow) he said he felt 'really terrible' about screwing up the Iowa caucus.
RESULT: Iowa lost its first-in-the-nation status. Still has an early caucus for party business, but presidential candidates are determined by mail-in ballots, Jan 12 to March's Super Tuesday.
The Republican electorate is the axis of Nazis, nuts and nincompoops. The old time bores are left out in the cold, and apparently all in New Hampshire, and that's why Haley did this well.
Her real hope is to stick it out through the convention by which time in a normal year his disabilities may have so revealed themselves there's a surge for her at a strategic moment. But this year most of the delegates will be there for him and he'll simply have to be dead, and if he's dead they'll turn on her and end up nominating anyone else.
No lies told.
If he's dead, they'll deny it angrily and loudly and nominate him ANYway because no stoopid SCIENTISTS are gonna tell THEM who to nominate so THERE!
And the Supreme Court will agree, because just as the 14th Amendment does not say someone who participated in insurrection may not RUN for office but only may not SERVE in office, so the Constitution does not require that one must be ALIVE to be a candidate for President or even to be ELECTED President.
The Lenin-Like Embalmed Corpse Of Trump for President! Whooo! THAT'll show those know-it-all libruls!
weekend at bernie's
I'm sure Nikki Haley, Ron DeSantis and these other Republicans whose lunch Trump has eaten with such relish are confused. They campaigned for months on praising him as the greatest president ever with no flaws whatsoever who's been the victim of history's greatest witchunt and now he's beaten them handily in a caucus and a primary. What went wrong?
well, at least their homes weren't firebombed, so there's that.
There’s plenty of time until the convention.
The New York Times cites “Democratic discontent with the president, which is abundantly evident in polling”; despite Biden winning without appearing on the ballot or campaigning in New Hampshire. Polls these days elicit single-digit response rates; if the polls actually reflected widespread discontent, New Hampshire voters had plenty of opportunity to vote for Phillips or Williamson. Haven’t seen actual numbers yet, but the call of the vote came very early, implying it wasn’t close.
Wapo says with about 88% counted, Biden leads Phillips 41-20, with other write-ins at 31. So Phillips, at 52 points behind the combined write-in total, has clearly caught the popular imagination. "Other" pulls in about 8. And this is with, anecdotally, a lot of Ds switching for the day to vote for Haley on the R ballot (must be another sign of massive discontent with Biden, or something).
Who doesn't think trump'll be bragging tomorrow about how his 55 beats Biden's 41?
Winning 41% as a write in is pretty amazing. I have to wonder how many times this has even happened.
Turns out what the Post meant by "other write-ins" was both non-Biden ones that had been tabulated, plus all the other ballots that the machines identified as write-ins but hadn't yet been tallied by humans. NYT distinguishes between tabulated and unprocessed write-ins, and the second category is still being worked through.
As of late Wednesday morning close to 12% have yet to be processed. Biden's current tally is 54%, Phillips's still about 20% (and won't change unless some galaxy brain redundantly wrote him in). Per TPM, there was a campaign to write in "ceasefire" that's probably been running about 6% of the write-ins. So Biden is on track to hit well over 60% as a write-in candidate, maybe as high as 65%.
Near midday Wednesday, with 92% of the votes reported, the AP has Biden with just under 54%, with about 12% of the ballots as ‘unprocessed write-ins’. Write-ins are running about 90% Biden, so his final percentage will almost certainly be higher; I would think near 60%
https://apnews.com/hub/ap-new-hampshire-election-2024-results
…was writing this as Altoid wrote much the same
After the loss, Haley still does not attack Trump on the main issues, but hopefully what she says looks to him offensive enough to make him even more rude towards her. That will put off undecided voters, so is useful for the general elections.
Maybe that is what she is trying to achieve?
It might be, assuming what she really wants is to tank his chances in November. But that strikes me as a big assumption. I think it's more likely she's trying to skate through the next few months without putting her full weight down-- staying acceptable to the non-MAGA world while going out of her way not to alienate the MAGA hordes-- in order to be the one Rs turn to either in 2028 or if something drastic happens to trump later this year. That's certainly how I read her recent theme about the "two 80-year-olds" gibbering around mouthfulls of applesauce-- not pointing to trump's character but to his birthday, which he can't do anything about. (Not a line I expect her to keep using much longer, though; I think she was genuinely surprised and pissed by the birther accusation.)
How she finally endorses trump will be the tell. If it's abject surrender and self-pwning like Tim Scott, that'll be one thing; if she tries to preserve some distance and independence, it'll mean she's looking ahead.
"... But that strikes me as a big assumption."
Why is it a big assumption?
Both for her and for her for the people that bankroll her campaign, Trump losing in November gives them better chances in the future. Why wouldn't they want him to lose?
They certainly want to avoid their house being burn down by his supporters, or if he wins being sent to the camps that prepared allegedly for immigrants but will be used for US citizen too. That limits how far they go against him. But I am sure they will be happier if he loses.
And we're told that 9 out of every 10 elected Republicans in DC totally despise trump and would be much happier if he lost, but they won't say so except off the record to reporters who won't name names, or through staff members who talk off the record to reporters who won't name names. In the end they'll all campaign for him and with him, and 98-2 odds she'll endorse him too.
And similarly with donors, who are now lining up behind him. Sure most might be personally happier if he lost, but they won't do anything overt to make that happen. And for everybody, it's for the reasons you mention.
I grant that it's possible she's baiting him to draw him into being more openly misogynistic and insulting about people who aren't white. Just color me skeptical that she's acting with a vision of the situation that's so big-scale and long-range and that could so easily result in violence against her. I think it goes against the public position she's been establishing as well as how she's been operating inside the R madhouse. But maybe that's just me.
"And we're told that 9 out of every 10 elected Republicans...."
More than 9 out of every 10 elected Republicans would be much better off if Trump loses, so it makes sense that really they want him to lose.
What they do in public is another question altogether.
"I think it goes against the public position she's been..."
So what?
Do you actually expect her to be honest in presenting her positions?
So the Defendant had some 9% more votes. Hardly "crushing" Gov Haley. This was a major underperformance for him, and he frothed and raged about it in his post-results Vengeance (sorry, "Victory") speech afterwards.
Haley has sunk the first barb. Let's hope she stays in and continues to weaken and madden him. The indignity of having a WOMAN! A BROWN woman! Whose parents weren't even from this country! Seriously challenging hin!! That's gotta cause a few hamburger plates to fly at the wall!
Sure, he'll be the "R" nominee; we always knew that. There was never any doubt. But he'll be more crazed and bloodied as a result of these primaries, and that's good. Makes him a less desireable candidate.
Except among the cult, which loves crazed.
The Google news page and the NYT are practically ignoring the Democratic primary result, while way overdoing coverage of the Republican vote. For Republicans, decades of being told that ‘government is the problem’ has lowered expectations so far, that all they want to vote for is either the lowest-quality entertainment (grade-school name-calling, etc.) or ‘owning the libs’, or both. It’s more disappointing to see the media playing up the orange buffoon in pursuit of eyeballs and the ad revenue that comes with them.
I’m definitely voting for four more years of all that boring stuff like working with our allies internationally and passing legislation to build America’s competitiveness, fight climate change, expand healthcare access, protect human rights, etc.