From the WaPost: The New Hampshire ballot rules may also have played a role. In previous contests, the state rotated candidate names from precinct to precinct, but this year the names were consistently in alphabetical order, with Clinton near the top and Obama lower down. Stanford professor Jon A. Krosnick, a survey specialist, has estimated the impact of appearing high on the New Hampshire ballot at three percentage points or greater. I have no reason--other than patriotism(!)--to think this isn't true!
She is delivering it more smoothly than I have seen her deliver a speech in a long, long time. There is more emotion in her voice and she seems very sincere. She is also not-so-subtly referencing her teary moment from yesterday. Slightly grating, to be sure, but probably just as effective as yesterday's big moment turned out to be. P.S. Even in defeat, Obama's speech was spectacular. --Isaac Chotiner
On MSNBC just now, Tom Brokaw basically just attacked Chris Matthews and the rest of the gang for fawning all over Obama the last five days. To paraphrase: "The voters did not want to hear that this thing was over. They wanted to make up their own minds." --Isaac Chotiner
Fox calls it for McCain. MSNBC, too. --Isaac Chotiner
In case you missed it because of all the New Hampshire coverage, I encourage everyone to check out Nazila Fahti's New York Times "Memo From Tehran" about the worsening relationship betweeh President Ahmadinejad and Ayatollah Khamenei: There are numerous possible reasons for Mr. Ahmadinejad’s loss of support, but analysts here all point to one overriding factor: the United States National Intelligence Estimate last month, which said Iran had suspended its nuclear weapons program in 2003 in response to international pressure.
It's hard to do justice to the mess that is Gloria Steinem's piece in today's Times but I'll give it a go. She begins: The woman in question became a lawyer after some years as a community organizer, married a corporate lawyer and is the mother of two little girls, ages 9 and 6.
From the NY Sun: Just hours after his wife got choked up on the campaign trail, President Clinton showed anger and frustration as he complained that the press has given a free pass to the nascent front-runner in the Democratic presidential contest, Senator Obama of Illinois. "It is wrong that Senator Obama got to go through 15 debates trumpeting his superior judgment and how he had been against the war in every year, enumerating the years, and never got asked one time--not once, 'Well, how could you say that when you said in 2004 you didn't know how you would have voted on the resolution?
My eyes are beginning to glaze over at the sight of polls, but some new numbers out in South Carolina are worth mentioning. I am generally skeptical of SurveyUSA's data, but Mike Huckabee's lead in their new poll can't go unmentioned. He leads Romney by 17 points, 36% to 19%. Giuliani is all the way down at fifth place with 9%. Perhaps even more embarrassingly, Fred Thompson is in 4th place with 11%. He's done. On the Democratic side, Obama is up 20 (Rasmussen has him ahead by 12).
Noam writes: For what it's worth, Mike and I ran into a Clinton insider last night who offered an additional twist on this argument: Not only does Clinton do better among registered Democrats than she does among independents and Republicans. But he thought registered Democrats would be especially inclined to give her a second look after Iowa and New Hampshire because they'd resent having their nominee chosen by a bunch of interlopers.
Reason's Kerry Howley had an op-ed in the Times yesterday which seemed pretty unconvincing. Here's Howley: If you’ve ever wondered why India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Pakistan and the Philippines seem readier to elect women than does the United States, here’s your answer: Societies that value a candidate’s family affiliation, and therefore have a history of nepotistic succession, are often open to female leadership so long as it bears the right brand. Benazir Bhutto, Indira Gandhi and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, among many others, slashed through gender barriers on the strength of their family names.