"Because it insults my intelligence"

Here are the corresponding numbers for New Hampshire, as reported by the AP:

Belknap - $6.6M total / $ 109 per person

Carroll - $63.1M / $1,334pp (!)

Chesire - $1M / $13pp

Coos - $2.6M total / $81pp

Grafton - $36.7M / $429pp

Hillsborough - $56M / $139pp

Merrimack - $21.1M / $143 pp

Rockingham - $48.4M /$163 pp

Strafford - $6.2M / $51pp

Sullivan - $2.7M / $61pp

Hillary and Heisenberg

Many are struggling with how to explain final polls in New Hampshire that showed Obama with a commanding double-digit lead from the final results, which ended up with a narrow Clinton victory (39%-37%). Pundits have pointed to her last minute 'tearing', her focus on experience, her support among women, and even President Bill Clinton's exasperated 'fairy tale' charges the night before the primary.

But a more relevant answer may be the following: Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle.

Heisenberg -- talking about atoms -- said that by trying to measure or observe a phenomenon, you invariably disturb its natural course. Thus, the polling in New Hampshire on Monday showed a race that looked effectively over. Women responded by giving their votes to Hillary, perhaps with the intent of narrowing the margin and reducing what looked to be an embarrassing defeat; independent men, thinking that Obama was safely ahead (with the Iowa boomlet), turned to the Republican side where John McCain had been making clear for weeks that unless he won New Hampshire (again), his campaign was effectively over.

Thus, by measuring rapidly-changing public opinion so effectively, and reporting the results so widely, the polls changed what they were in fact measuring. Whether such a confluence of events could ever happen again is debatable. But it happened Tuesday.

On a side note: New Hampshire's voters helped to support the future of the 'first-in-the-nation' NH Primary. If Hillary is elected, there's no way that New Hampshire won't keep 'first' -- at least on the Democratic side -- through 2016. After all, the Clintons owe the state.

Update (1/13): Thanks to reader BM for correcting the author of the theory: Heisenberg, not Heidenberg. Unfortunately, others have made the same typographical error. More important, Heisenberg did not technically identify the 'observer effect', although it is an implication of his theory, which states that certain qualities of subatomic particles cannot be measured; Schroedinger apparently identified the observer effect, which states that "subatomic objects are both waves and particles until direct observation, though the two are often confused." In any event, the post was about an analogy to physics, not a direct relationship; in the future, we'll try to leave physics to the, um, rocket scientists.

Predictions: New Hampshire

Picking up where we left off in Iowa:

GOP:
1. McCain - reminiscing
2. Romney - energized
3. Giuliani - hopeful
4. Huckabee - bad track
5. Thompson - wondering

Dems:
1. Obama - ran away
2. Clinton - losing touch
3. Edwards - angrily
4. Richardson - heading West

Update:
Obviously, the combination of independent women moving towards Hillary, and independent men (many of whom surely felt that Obama's apparent growing lead was safe) moving towards McCain -- as they did in 2000 -- was instrumental.

However, it's clear that Hillary's margin was obtained in the urban wards in Manchester, Berlin, and Nashua; a quick analysis would indicate that the race will be a traditional city/suburban split. But New Hampshire's cities -- like the state itself -- are overwhelmingly white. As the race moves south and west, cities will be much more diverse, and therefore more amenable to an Obama appeal.

It is worth noting that while New Hampshire has a huge "Independent" bloc, many are Independent because there are no penalties for being so -- the actual independents are probably in the 10% range, not the reported 40%. In other states, most NH Independents will stay in their respective parties.

Hillary and the Expectations Game

Could not agree more with Seth Gitell's recent post about the 'Hillary-in-free-fall' stories that are now rampant in the press. For instance, Howard Fineman's piece earlier in the week (clearly written pre-debate, although the dynamics did not change yesterday) is featured prominently on Drudge this afternoon. Billy Shaheen's comments over the past few days resulted in his resignation from the NH campaign yesterday, giving rise to a series of stories about a 'campaign-in-disarray'. And the New York Times' Adam Nagourney earlier in the week wrote a story emphasizing how the Clintons have never really campaigned in Iowa (the 1992 caucuses were ceded to favorite son Tom Harkin) and that there was tension between the President's advisors and the campaign's staff.

The reality is that as a former First Lady, with extremely high name-recognition, and a national front runner for months on end, expectations should be -- fairly -- for convincing wins everywhere. Moreover, the 'inevitability' argument that the Clinton campaign has been touting for months should be making a loss anywhere -- Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, or South Carolina -- a mortal wound.

(Just as a point of comparision -- and yes, it was a different era and before the Iowa caucuses took on their current importance -- but, LBJ 'lost' the New Hampshire primary in 1968, even though he received a majority (49%) of the votes, to Gene McCarthy's 42%.)

Yes, Hillary has had a bad month. Yes, Obama has proved to be an effective counter-puncher. And yes, there's still a lot of time left (although less time than the calendar would indicate, when one takes into account the days lost to Christmas and the holiday week.)

But right now, a win in Iowa for Hillary would effectively end the race. And even a convincing win by Obama there may not end the talk of a Clinton 'firewall' in New Hampshire, Nevada, or
South Carolina. Moreover, with the Democratic delegates reflecting proportional representation (see, e.g., 2004 NH Democratic results) -- rather than the closer-to-winner-take-all primaries on the GOP side (see 2000 Michigan results) -- meaning that a wounded Clinton campaign could continue on past Super Tuesday and into the Spring.

The Clinton campaign has one other advantage: a base level of support that is the flip side to her high negative ratings. While some voters will not vote for her under any circumstances, others -- and especially women -- want to vote in favor of the first truly viable woman candidate. It should surprise no one that Clinton's new ad is focused on three generation of "Rodham" women, all of who think Hillary should be president.

January 8th: Bad News for NH

Shortly before Thanksgiving, New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner did the expected: he set the date for the New Hampshire Primary to be January 8, 2008. And the big winner with that decision: The Iowa Caucuses.

Gardner, to his credit, felt that he was hamstrung by the NH statute that required the primary to be set at least seven days before any 'similar' event -- in this case, the Michigan primary, scheduled for January 15th. While most Democrats (all except Hillary and Mike Gravel) have eschewed the Michigan contest (to support to the DNC-mandated protection of the 'early' states), the Republicans expect to have a full-throated contest, which forced Gardner's hand.

While everyone has been focusing on the scant five-day period between Iowa and New Hampshire, it also matters which five days. Iowa itself is just two days after New Year's Day; and occurs on a Thursday. Coverage of Iowa will dominate the Friday (1/4) papers and broadcasts, and the "winners"(*) will also get the benefit of an additional day of bounce because Saturday (1/5) is a traditionally slow-news-day.

The battle to be on the Sunday (1/6) talk shows will pit Democrat against Republican, especially among those top-tier candidates who did not perform well in Iowa, and who need a New Hampshire bounce to stop the bleeding. Monday's (1/7) coverage will be about the
various candidates racing around the state, followed by 'soft' news stories about the early voting at Hart's Location and Dixville Notch.

The bottom line is that whomever "wins"(*) Iowa will have a huge leg up on New Hampshire, and that the cycle of press coverage is likely to make a double-winner -- like John Kerry did in 2004.

Meanwhile, somewhere in the US Capitol, Senator Lamar Alexander shakes his head and thinks of what might have been in 1996, a primary that was held on February 20th. (Alexander finished a strong third in Iowa, behind Senator Bob Dole and TV commentator Pat Buchanan; Buchanan then won New Hampshire, but Dole held off Alexander by a mere 6,000 votes, meaning that Dole became the 'insider' hope to prevent a Buchanan nomination.)

(*) - "win" means to perform above press expectations, and/or win outright.

Fallen Heroes

There's no shortage of critics of Dirk Nowitzki today, although TrueHoop has the best suggestion for the German star: refuse to accept the MVP award.

But this is not the 'biggest upset in NBA history.' Dallas won 67 games by healthy for most of the season (each of Nowitzki, Josh Howard, Jason Terry, DeSagana Diop, Erick Dampier, and Devin Harris played in 70+ games; Jerry Stackhouse played in 67), in a League that is injury-producing, and that has a regular season that is (a) too long and (b) means very little.

Golden State, on the other hand, survived a long season despite Baron Davis' knee surgery in February, and a major trade. (Most similar player to Davis, by the way (according to Basketball Reference), is former Knick Ray Williams.)

The Warriors appear to be peaking at the right time, are better than their record (42-40), and possess a clear home court edge. With neither the Rockets nor the Jazz in possession of a major low-post threat (a la Tim Duncan), there's no reason think the Nellie-ride will end soon.

Finally, on a personal note, as a three-time alum of the Nelson/Sanders Basketball Camp in Durham, NH, congratulations to Don Nelson.

Romney on the Radio

Although there appear to be a dearth of references to it in the blogosphere, Mitt Romney had a positive/bio radio ad this morning on the Imus in the Morning Show on WTKK (96.9 FM). The station does have some reach into southern New Hampshire, and perhaps Romney's advisers are trying to counteract this recent NH poll:

McCain - 28 percent of likely New Hampshire voters
Giuliani - 27 percent.
Romney - 13 percent.

Source: WMUR/CNN

Nominees Finish...Second?

Today's Globe article by Scott Helman featuring a leaked (or perhaps lost) Romney campaign strategy memo contains the following:

The plan concedes that, with McCain and Giuliani in the race, Romney is unlikely to be the top pick for those voters looking for a "war/strong leader." His goal appears to be establishing himself as a credible second choice for those voters, but the first pick for voters looking for an energetic, optimistic, and innovative chief executive. (A page titled "Own the future" dubs McCain the past, Giuliani the present, and Romney the future. )

Running for second place, or at least running to be the second choice of McCain- or Giuliani-supporters is a little reminescent of the last Massachusetts politician to run for President:

Bumper Sticker in Iowa and NH: "Dated Dean, Married Kerry."

Coos County

Hillary's first NH appearance this weekend received excellent reviews; great front page coverage in the Boston Globe (the "paper of record" for much of Southern New Hampshire, where the vast majority of the votes are). A subtle but savvy decision was the one to make the first appearance in beleaguered Berlin, in northern Coos County.

Berlin (pronounced with an accent on the first syllable) was in tough shape economically back in 1999-2000. Since then, apparently, the last paper mill (there were 4 at one time) has closed, and the city has hemorrhaged jobs.

In 2000, when she began her campaign for the Senate seat, Hillary eschewed the West Side and spent day after day "upstate", listening to the towns and cities that had been left behind in the go-go-1990s. Perhaps with a parallel, Saturday's visit was one of the places in the coasts (and in NH) that directly mirror the experience of the industrial midwest.

All that being said, Hillary promised Berliners that she wouldn't forget them. Query: how do residents of Plattsburgh and Watertown, and other upstate NY towns that were part of the 2000 "listening tour" feel?

McCain's Slipping in NH?

The Boston Herald is reporting a new poll showing McCain slipping significantly among independent voters in New Hampshire, from 49% a year to 29% today. The New Hampshire findings are similar to those reported last month in the Washington Post, which showed McCain slipping about 15% nationwide among independents.

But while the national polls will be cited as vulnerability on McCain's strongest argument -- general election appeal -- the New Hampshire one has more immediate ramifications. Independent voters are especially important in New Hampshire because they can take either ballot -- Republican or Democractic -- when they go to the polls on Primary Day; in 2000, McCain's surge came from Independents who chose him over Bill Bradley.)

The decline comes at a time when McCain is backing the President's plan for sending more troops to Iraq and has aggressively reached out to conservative groups and Christian conservative leaders, both of which are unpopular among independents. Moreover, he may have calculated that notwithstanding New Hampshire, independents are not are important as 'base conservatives' in GOP primaries. Those voters were Bush's firewall in South Carolina, and McCain has been trying to create own "Southern safe haven."

Do not be surprised to see a number of "McCain in trouble" stories in the press. The polls referenced above will start the ball rolling, and will be reinforced by a grouchy press corps that will no longer have the same unfettered access to the candidate as they had in 2000 on the "Straight Talk Express." But the GOP base is no fan of the MSM, and McCain may in fact be helped with Republican voters when he is criticized by the editorial pages of the NYT.