And under the excitement of the horse race, which is now very wide open, we have the questions Bev Harris and others have been asking about the trustworthiness of the voting system, with one person in charge of 80% of the vote counting in NH.
Former Olympics exec Romney spun his loss as "another silver."
Huckabee was gleeful for coming in third ahead of Giuliani, who pulled 9%, barely edging out Ron Paul, who pulled 8%.
Richardson pulled 5%. Kucinich and Thompson pulled 1% and Gravel, Dodd, Biden and Hunter pulled zilch.
Women desserted Obama for Hillary. Students and under 30s didn't come out in NH like they did in Iowa for Obama.
Did Hillary's moment of tears help, in spite of the corpsestream media's attempts to "Howard-Deanize" it?
Next stops Michigan, South Carolina, Nevada, Florida, Maine, then, on Feb 5-- Super Tuesday... It's a miracle, the stamina these politicians possess.
Rob Kall is executive editor and publisher of OpEdNews.com, President of Futurehealth, Inc, inventor . He is also published regularly on the Huffingtonpost.com and is a columnist with Northstarwriters.com. He is a frequent Speaker on Politics, Impeachment, The art, science and power of story, heroes and the hero's journey, Positive Psychology, Stress, Biofeedback and a wide range of subjects. He is a campaign consultant specializing in tapping the power of stories for issue positioning, stump speeches and debates. He recently retired as organizer of several conferences, including StoryCon, the Summit Meeting on the Art, Science and Application of Story and The Winter Brain Meeting on neurofeedback, biofeedback, Optimal Functioning and Positive Psychology. See more of his articles here and, older ones, here.
To learn more about me and OpEdNews.com, check out this article.
and there are Rob's quotes, here.
To Watch me on youtube, having a lively conversation with John Conyers, Chair of the House Judiciary committee, click here Now, wouldn't you like to see me on the political news shows, representing progressives. If so, tell your favorite shows to bring me on and refer them to this youtube video
My radio show, The Rob Kall Show, runs 9-10 PM EST Wednesday evenings, on AM 1360, WNJC and is archived on www.whiterosesociety.org Or listen to it streaming, live at either www.wnjc1360.com or here.
A few declarations.
-While I'm registered as a Democrat, I consider myself to be a dynamic critic of the Democratic party, just as, well, not quite as much, but almost as much as I am a critic of republicans.
-My articles express my personal opinion, not the opinion of this website.
I'm not really disappointed with the results of the New Hampshire primary election last night because it was fairly competitive, and thus hardly indicative of who the final nominees will be.
The candidates' positions on the issues are far more important to me than their personality. As someone who is pro-life and against the Iraq war, let me summarize the candidates this way.
Hillary Clinton is neither likeable nor electable.
Barack Obama and John Edwards are likeable but not electable.
Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee are both likeable and electable.
Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, and Fred Thompson are neither likeable nor electable.
John McCain is likeable but only electable as a last resort.
I am so fascinated with the potential of the 2008 presidential campaign that I have decided to vote in my state's primary election for the first time in my life. Who will I vote for? I'm not sure yet!
by
Justin Soutar (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 25 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 8:07:13 AM
I disagree with some of those assessments. I think Obama is very electable. He has more charisma than any candidate in a long time, and it is well documented that American elections are not generally decided on issues.
And I don't think Ron Paul is electable. He attracts real enthusiasm, but only among a narrow group, The majority view him as something of a kook. It's something of a cult phenomenon. Libertarianism is something of a political cult.
Is Clinton electable? I think she's borderline. She inspires more negative reaction than almost any other candidate. But it's logically the Democrats' election to lose (which they've been pretty good at), most of the Republicans running aren't going to get many voters excited, and she excels at political organization. I actually think Huckabee is the only Republican with a decent chance of beating Hillary. I think he's the only one who could take away some of the basic Democratic base - I think he would attract enough of the African-American vote (20% would almost certainly do it, and he got 30% in his last gubernatorial election) to tip the balance in several states.
Obama and Huckabee are the only candidates with real charisma, and I think are the best bets for electability for the two parties. Head to head, I think Obama would win because 1) he has the greater charisma, 2) it basically should be a Democratic year, and 3) he should be able to keep all or nearly all of the Democrats' African-American base (which I don't think any of the white candidates could do against Huckabee).
by
Bill Samuel (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 330 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 8:27:29 AM
New Hampshire proved it last night, when "THE BRADLEY EFFECT" blew up the pre-written media headlines.
People will say they are going to vote for Obama, but on election day, they aren't going to do it in the same numbers, just like they always don't. That's the main reason why the media and GOP have been pushing and praising Obama. Because they know he wouldn't win in November. Not a "young-looking" one-term black Senator. Most swing voters are going to say he's not ready, and the opposition knows that.
Even though Clinton barely finished first in NH last night, 54% of voters still said that they wanted change. When the General Election comes around, there would be a severe "DYNASTY" backlash, against her, so the GOP is perfectly fine with her getting the nomination. If Clinton gets the nomination, Karl Rove and the GOP are going to expose every single thing that went on in the Clinton White House, things that none of us know about.
The GOP feared Edwards in 2004, and they still do.
If Democrats wanted to win, they'd choose Edwards, but Democrats follow the media spectacle, so Edwards has very little chance, even though he's won only 7 less delegates than Obama has, at this point.
by
Wethe Leaders (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 14 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 9:20:52 AM
Give us a call when you come back from Never-Never Land.
John Edwards has shown all year long in survey after survey that he is 5,000,000 times more electable than Clinton or Obama.
The fact that polls have shown him being the ONLY DEMOCRAT who consistently beats John McCain, and the ONLY DEMOCRAT who consistently beats "ALL" Republicans in Ohio and NORTH CAROLINA (Clinton and Obama do not) proves that Edwards is the most electable.
The Clintons may have won the White House in 1992, but they lost everything else for the Democratic Party, and made the party think that it needs to behave like Republicans in order to win, which is the dumbest thing ever.
by
Wethe Leaders (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 14 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 9:14:15 AM
Sorry to confuse you, Bill and Lethe. I used the word "electable" above to describe how the candidates measure up against my own convictions. How America votes can obviously be another story.
by
Justin Soutar (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 25 comments)
on Friday, January 11, 2008 at 10:43:18 AM
She won by 2%! According to Gary Langer Hillary's name was at the top of the Ballot, and Obama's was at the bottom of the ballot. He stated flatly that name placement accounted for 3%...
So, before we start talking desertion, there are other explanations. The fact that Hillary won by 2% in a state that is in her backyard speaks volumes...
The next primary is on Tuesday, in Michigan... We will see what the Obama gets from the semi-home-field advantage..
Just an observation, I don't have a horse in the Dem Race, so I am unbiased when I make these statements..
Ciao, CZ
by
steve scheetz (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 667 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 8:41:17 AM
In case you did not know, Obama and Edwards pulled out of Michigan and Michigan's election will not count according to the National Democratic Party. Penalizing Michigan for moving up the primary date.
GoBlue
by
Goblue (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 42 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 10:38:25 AM
I was going to respond to you on another thread...
One being that she is part of the establishment and they want to continue Bush regime's imperialist agenda.
I think you nailed it... The big Corporate interests need a big corporate WHORE to be in the white house.. This is why I am still saying that it is going to be Rudy and Hillary for the main event in November...
The true powers that be won't allow anyone who is not a 150% YES MAN in the office...
Ciao, CZ
by
steve scheetz (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 667 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 11:28:33 AM
People commute to the Greater Boston area from New Hampshire. Boston is definitely "more of the same" type of government that's already taking most of us decent citizens down. The home of State Street, which claims assets under custody of US$15.1 trillion, is a major agent of foreign money power. These people think Phoenix is a suburb of Philadelphia. They honestly don't think there's anything else between.
People keep wondering why our elected representatives don't listen to the voters after they're elected. They pander to the voters, like junior executives vying for the top slot of their company. But when they finally get there, they still take orders from their board of directors, controlled by their bankers. Same with Bush / Cheney / Paulson, etc. Do you really think they have any power at all, not given to them by their financial puppetmasters. Why else would they lie, steal and murder? That's not what the voters asked.
What has Ron Paul proven? That in America, no longer is a decent man electable. Sad to say from Heart of America country, the very area they say doesn't exist.
by
Edward Ulysses Cate (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 221 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 10:28:26 AM
I really don't understand when people refer to Ron Paul as a "kook", "crackpot" or a "flake". He is the only one who really makes any sense and is the only one who speaks the truth about what is really going on in our country. Our rights are being taken away every day; we are going broke because of the war on terror along with funding dictators; the law of the land, the US Constitution and Bill of Rights don't apply to our supposed leaders nor to the American people any more; we are in countries we should not be in; our politicians work for the corporate interests and not the people who elected them and the list goes on. And I will say, nothing will change without a leader who has the guts to stand up to what is right without corporate influences. Ron Paul stands on his own and is probably one of the very few honest politicians.
by
Rick Theile (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 50 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 10:55:05 AM
Those who slander Ron Paul are neolibs and neocons by intent or ignorance. Those who fear Ron Paul because of their ignorance can only be educated if the are open to conservative concepts, and unfortuantley, the left is as full of party loyalists and special interest groups as the right. For us supporting Ron Paul, we have allot of compromising to make on both sides, because the GOP claims Ron Paul and the rEVOLution are RINOS and that is true, except for the minority of GOP lifers who saw the light. No matter how badly we need a revolution chere to end these wars and massive destruction of life as we cherish it, and want it to be of, by and for peace, when the opportunity knocks, there will always be those who find an excuse as to why they can't reach the door.
by
Jeanette Doney (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 304 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 11:16:48 AM
People refer to Ron Paul as kook, crackpot and flake because those are the most polite and respectful adjectives available to describe his malicious and hurtful philosophy of pandering to greed.
by
Robert Chapman (28 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 556 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 12:34:01 PM
A candidate who takes no corporate contributions, didn't vote for or take a congressional pay raise, returns a portion of the money he doesn't use, doesn't plan on taking SS or congressional pension, doesn't use congressional healthcare... opposes the NWO, NAFTA, WTO, multinational corporate contracts for war,..is the actions of a man pandering to Greed? Where? Because he wants to end the hineous war on drugs or the wars in the ME, and pull USA global military occupation so peoples of this world can ACT LOCALLY and THINK GLOBALLY without a massive government NWO dictatorship making them slaves to a armed government with an agenda 21.
I don't see Ron Paul pandering to Greed. I see a PEACE candidate who's standing to give America back to the people who want a nation to sustain and love and build communities they can establish with their own laws that benefit them, not some Arab King in Dubai or Chinese Communist party leader sweating kids. Ron Paul is NOT supporting the elite globalist corporations. He's standing for people like me, who want cannabis a legal crop in my community where we can create healthcare for people who actually want to be healthy with good food and clean environment that we do, not some McDDonal'sArcoMexican Slave labor sell out.
Where do you get the idea that Ron Paul is pandering to greed?
by
Jeanette Doney (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 304 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 2:23:35 PM
Black box voting just revealed a convicted felon programmed the machines for yesterdays primary. Also a NH family voted but their candidate showed as 0 for the precinct. Alex Jones has offered the 60,000 for the fee to contest the outcome. I new it was a fraud.
by
john riggs (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 439 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 12:25:26 PM
The Democratic Candidates combined for over 260,000 votes against a total of around 180,000 for the GOP.
This represents a significant early advantage for the Dems in this reddest of the NE states.
Clinton showed that she could push the needle as her supporters made a brilliant grass roots effort to push her into the top spot in this primary.
This is the case nation-wide. The network of Hillary supporters consist of core Democratic activists who are getting at politics. No other candidate has a bottom up movement such as this backing him.
Obama and his supporters are an essential part of the Democratic constituency, but they are responding to the top down appeal of his enormous charisma rather than shared values and experiences.
The committed and hard-bitten activists who form Clinton's core supporters will deliver again and again and again.
by
Robert Chapman (28 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 556 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 12:31:27 PM
Apparently people who are keeping an eye on the disparity between electronic ballots (on Diebold machines in NH) and hand-counted paper ballots (yes, parts of NH still use them) have noticed a 5-7% shift in favor of Clinton over Obama when comparing the ratios of electronic "ballots" vs. paper ballots. That still doesn't account for the 16% swing observed relative to Zogby's polling, however. There is a strong statistical argument for election fraud in these numbers.
Also, according to election officials, Ron Paul received zero votes (after supposedly 100% of the vote was counted) in some precincts where voters have since come forward and stated explicitly that they voted for Paul. That's not a statistical anomaly-- it's out and out election fraud and it should be investigated and reported. Ron Paul should demand a recount.
Maybe if we had enough money, we could afford to hire Zogby to do a poll in NH today, asking people if they voted and who they voted for.
Don't give up on the issue of election reform. Keep talking about it. Keep demanding that electronic voting machines be banned and paper ballots (marked by the voters) be used instead. On 11/29/07, The New York Times Editorial Board said
"The 2008 presidential election is fast approaching and some states are still using unreliable paperless computerized voting machines That is a big mistake. The danger is too great of votes being recorded wrong — or stolen."
So, it would seem the idea that electronic voting systems should be banned is an idea whose time has come. The challenge now is in each of the 50 state legislatures (because choice of voting systems is the preorogative of the States).
by
Marcus B (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 27 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 1:34:18 PM
ALL polls showed Obama ahead, by double digits in some cases
DIEbold machines counted the votes
Kucinich and Paul are the only candidates with proven integrity; the "top tier" of both fake sides are not to be trusted- Clinton "won" cuz she's done the best job of proving she's a whore for the corporate fascist state. If the corporate media gave honest coverage to Kucinich and Paul, they would be beating all the other candidates- Kucinich and Paul do much better, are frequently number 1, among people that get their news online.
by
Better World Order (4 articles, 432 quicklinks, 28 diaries, 925 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 2:25:47 PM
I went to a few Ron Paul bloggs and they are all ready on top of it mobilizing for a recount, a law suit and I LOVE the rEVOLution actually being around people fired up and being active. Daily paul has near 1500 people now.
by
Jeanette Doney (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 304 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 2:28:11 PM
is at the moment obtaining the criminal record of the drug-runner that supposedly programmed the NH machines. If the US citizen is stupid enough to put the bush-clinton mafia back in the whitehouse that is one thing, but if it is done by fraud we must not accept it. We all know the elites own the press, they have all the money and they own the judges. If another instance of fraud is reported in SC we as a people must act. A few thousand people can shut down XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXX and done in all the major cities it would put a dent in the bottom line. It is high time for some action.
by
john riggs (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 439 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 2:45:18 PM
in seeing the results by precinct... Let's test the theories... We have polls going in, presumably by precinct, and we can see what happened on the other side...
Let's see what actually happened...
Ciao, CZ
by
steve scheetz (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 667 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 2:57:42 PM
... And are thus unbelievable. Didn't we all just live through... and personally experience... the manipulated general elections of 2000 and 2004?
We're on a path towards totalitarianism! Remember that one? That's the statist-ruled reality where your opinion counts for nothing at all - unless you happen to be one of the elitists making up the rules as you go along!
Trust in your guts, people. The polls are fraudulently skewed, the spin you're being spoon-fed is not yours, and only one candidate speaks to the urgency of our situation.
The media-anointed top-tier candidates are in the pockets of the CFR, the Bilderbergers, AIPAC, or the kleptocracy and their fancy lobbyists (both foreign and domestic) who are enriched by status quo corporatism - Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Giuliani, McCain, Thompson, Huckabee, and Romney - just follow the money timeline and their direct connections.
Ask yourself who Big Media answers to. Who commissions these polls? Is the vote-counting transparent? Who pays for each one of these candidates' expensive media ads? Which candidates are being marginalized by those highly-paid media hot shots... and why?
So who else are your earthly masters anyway - you, or so many others you may never meet... except by their enforcement proxies on the street, in your mailbox, on your TV, or at your door?
You want to see change? Then forget about electability. Just forget about ballot-rigging and corruptible m
