An early night! With first and second place settled in both the Democratic and Republican races, we’re putting a bow on our New Hampshire primary live blog relatively early. Tuesday, Feb. 9, 2016, will likely go down as a historic day in American electoral politics. Trump and Sanders, separately, represent powerful currents in the electorate, and New Hampshire voters have done their best to prolong the 2016 nominating contests: Cruz, Bush and Rubio are all muddled together with 10 percent to 12 percent of the New Hampshire vote. They will finish, in some order, third, fourth and fifth. We’re also likely to see several Republican candidates drop out over the next 48 hours. Meanwhile, Sanders has a big win, but he will now have to compete in two states, Nevada and South Carolina, with much less friendly demographics. That is all to say: We’re going to have a lot more coverage of tonight’s results in the days ahead. Thanks for hanging out. ’Night!
(UPDATE, Feb. 10, 2:17 a.m.): Nate, Clare, Harry and Jody recorded a late-night podcast with some thoughts on the results. Listen to it below, or subscribe in your favorite podcast player.
Listen to the latest episode of the FiveThirtyEight politics podcast.
Nate Silver
One of my favorite cross-tabulations in the exit poll is its breakdown of when voters made their final decision. In Iowa, Trump faded substantially among late deciders, leading to his second-place finish. Presumably he did better in New Hampshire? Well, sort of. In the table below, which is derived from the exit poll, I’ve grouped voters who decided “just today” or within the last few days into the “late decider” group and those who made a decision “in the last month” or “before that” into the “early decider” group. The results suggest that Trump didn’t do particularly well among late deciders, winning 22 percent of their votes. But he had a lot of voters who were loyal to him from the start:
CANDIDATE
EARLY DECIDERS
LATE DECIDERS
Trump
48
22
Kasich
10
22
Cruz
12
12
Bush
9
12
Rubio
9
12
Christie
4
10
What about Rubio? Presumably Saturday night’s debate cost him a lot of support? Yes, probably, although overall Rubio actually did slightly better among late deciders (12 percent) than early ones (9 percent). What may have happened is that voters who initially were intrigued by Rubio after Iowa backed away from him after the debate; the 11 percent or so of the vote he’ll get tonight is close to where he was in pre-Iowa polls of New Hampshire.
Carl Bialik
Who Benefits If Carson And Fiorina Drop Out?
Fiorina and Carson are projected to finish a distant seventh and eighth, respectively, in New Hampshire. Despite their poor finish today, they have the support between them of about one in nine Republican voters nationally: In our latest national polling average, Fiorina had 2.5 percent and Carson 8.3 percent. So what happens if they drop out of the race? Cruz probably would benefit more than Trump would.
The online pollsters at Morning Consult added up results from January polls it conducted among 5,456 Republicans and Republican-leaning independents nationally, asking for their first and second choices among the candidates. So far Morning Consult has published second-choice data for supporters of candidates who have already dropped out. They shared with us the data for Carson and Fiorina. Among Carson supporters, 24 percent had Cruz as their second choice, 19 percent named Trump and 10 percent named Rubio. Fiorina had far fewer supporters, but they might be higher leverage: 23 percent said they supported Rubio, 14 percent named Cruz and 5 percent named Trump. (Another 18 percent named Carson, and in this scenario those supporters would need to go to their third choice, or maybe skip voting.) Of course, these polls preceded the votes in Iowa and New Hampshire, and voters’ second choices could be even more volatile than their first choices are.
Nate Silver
It’s not clear yet whether Christie will end his campaign. As I wrote earlier, Christie has been perhaps the most consistent Republican in the debates. He’s also a strong retail campaigner, which was evident here in New Hampshire. But Christie’s liabilities, from Bridgegate to his periodic deviations from conservative orthodoxy, were formidable also. He had plenty of opportunity to break out in New Hampshire and instead faded toward the end. It just doesn’t look like voters are buying what Christie is selling.
Think I’d buy Rubio, but that’s probably because I didn’t watch the whole debate.
Harry Enten
I’m selling Trump, Nate.
Nate Silver
I’d buy Cruz.
Farai Chideya
If I sold Christie for a penny I’d probably get a tenth of a penny in return. So, I guess then sell Rubio.
Ritchie King
Sell Bush.
Julia Azari
Sell Rubio.
Julia Azari
I was gonna buy Kasich until he told me to hug people at the mall.
Jody Avirgan
Sell Trump.
Nate Silver
OK, all, here are the current betting market odds for the GOP nomination right now, per PredictWise (as of 10:20 p.m.). You get one buy OR one sell. Just one. Who is it?
Farai Chideya
Regarding the big remaining questions: I will be very curious to see how younger black voters break. If Clinton is currently winning black voters and young Democrats/independents are leaning toward Sanders, I wonder if the assiduous courtship of the #BlackLivesMatter generation will work.
Anne Li
Candidate Watch: Kasich
Until tonight, Kasich did not receive much attention as a presidential candidate, which he even joked about early in his “victory” speech (Kasich placed a distant second to Trump).
Kasich’s speech was a good example of how unusual his message is in this campaign; he’s really been the only candidate, left or right, to talk about political polarization, saying that all Americans are ultimately in it together. Although such bipartisanship is admirable and might play well in a general election, it may not help Kasich persuade GOP primary voters to back him.
Julia Azari
Yeah, there are four people now competing for the not-Trump spot on the Republican side, and IMO the concept of “lanes” has gone to hell. Cruz, Kasich, Bush and Rubio are all in the same lane. That lane is otherwise known as “getting the nomination.”
The other big question, on the Democratic side, is what will minority voters do? But we won’t get that answer tonight.
Harry Enten
Who is going to be the anti-Trump? Will there be multiple anti-Trumps? You can’t have four of them. You can probably have, at most, two. I think one of those is Cruz, but who is the other one? (If there even is another one.)
Micah Cohen
What are the big questions we’re still looking for answers to tonight?
Harry Enten
David, I dare say Clinton’s coalition is starting to look a little bit like Obama’s. That is, wealthier white voters and black voters. If, however, Clinton loses black voters to Sanders, then she’s in a world of trouble. There’s no sign she’s losing those voters yet, though.
David Wasserman
Surprise, surprise: Some of Clinton’s best towns (perhaps more accurate: least worst towns) tonight were some of her weakest towns in 2008. It looks like she’s taken 46 percent in Exeter, 43 percent in Portsmouth and 43 percent in Concord. Most surprisingly, there’s even one report she took 47 percent in Hanover, home to Dartmouth College (this has not yet been reported by the AP). Clinton appears to be doing better with academic types in New Hampshire this time, but has cratered with rural and blue collar Democrats.
Julia Azari
Viability vs. Electability
In their book “Why Iowa?” David Redlawsk, Caroline Tolbert and Todd Donovan argue that early contests allow candidates to demonstrate viability and electability — they show voters in later contests that they can win the nomination and be competitive for the general election.
Tonight’s victories have probably done a lot for perceptions of viability for Sanders and Trump. But what about electability? I’ve argued before that Trump might be more electable than he seems. Maybe that’s true of Sanders too. But, based on my experience studying political rhetoric, I’m not sure either of these speeches sounded like a successful general election candidate quite yet. We probably want to see some more contests — in more populous and diverse states — before the electability question is resolved.
Anne Li
Candidate Watch: Trump
Just as he was during his concession speech in Iowa, Trump was a standard, polite politician during his New Hampshire victory speech — for the first couple of minutes, anyway. As Farai pointed out, the transition came — with normal Trump un-subtlety — with, “Now that I got that over with!”
Then Trump took a more Trumpian path: He’ll strengthen the border, rebuild the military, preserve the Second Amendment and make America great again “the good ol’ fashioned way” — because he has friends, because he loves his supporters and because his supporters love him.
Nate Silver
The Road Ahead For Bernie
The next two states to vote in the Democratic primary are Nevada and South Carolina. (Nevada votes before South Carolina for Democrats; the reverse is true for Republicans.) In both cases, there’s been a conspicuous absence of polling: Nevada hasn’t been polled since December, and South Carolina was polled a few times in January but hasn’t been surveyed since Iowa. Still, one thing that’s clear is that the terrain is going to be tougher for Sanders from here forward. Here are the current FiveThirtyEight polling averages for Clinton and Sanders in all of the states where we’re keeping track of them.
DATE
STATE
CLINTON
SANDERS
2/20
Nevada
50.3
28.1
2/27
South Carolina
60.5
29.3
3/8
Michigan
59.9
29.0
3/15
Florida
61.0
26.0
3/15
North Carolina
55.9
28.3
3/15
Ohio
52.8
38.6
4/5
Wisconsin
45.6
43.4
4/26
Pennsylvania
51.4
28.0
6/7
California
46.3
32.9
FiveThirtyEight polling averages as of Feb. 9
Sanders has a bright spot in Wisconsin, and Ohio and California look better for him than some of the other states. But he starts way behind Clinton in most other places and will need a lot of momentum out of tonight.
Tonight’s victory speeches include the “political revolution” Sanders called for and Trump admitting that his ground game in Iowa wasn’t up to snuff. The crowd chanted “USA” during interludes in Trump’s speech, and Trump himself played around with the “nice Trump”/pugilist dichotomy. “I’d like to congratulate the other candidates,” he said at one point, quickly parrying: “Now that I got that over with! …” As he heads to South Carolina, surfacing the “nice Trump” and running a tight ground game may be critically important. Although Trump leads in South Carolina, Cruz’s following among evangelical voters may sway votes in numbers larger than polls indicate. That’s what happened in Iowa. (I’m also struck by how domestically focused Sanders’s speech was compared with a large focus on trade and world influence in Trump’s speech.)
Nate Silver
To a first approximation, I agree with this tweet from New Yorker writer Ryan Lizza:
But one irony is that the Republican Party finally did seem to be doing a bit of deciding — Rubio received 10 endorsements, including quite a few high-profile ones, between the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary. The failures more came earlier in the election cycle, when the party didn’t do a good job of clearing the field or vetting its candidates. It’s like when you leave for the airport with exactly enough time to get to your gate. Maybe you’ll make it, but you have no one to blame but yourself if you encounter a long security line and miss your flight instead.
Harry Enten
If you’re wondering who is going to come in third on the Republican side, you’re not alone. I have no idea, to be honest. Right now, Bush, Cruz and Rubio are all within 1.2 percentage points of one another, with many votes to be counted. It should be noted that none of them is above 12 percent right now, though Cruz leads, with Rubio in fifth.
Anne Li
Candidate Watch: Sanders
Sanders, having won New Hampshire, seemed to be trying to address one of his core weaknesses in his (extended) victory speech: electability. Early on in his speech, he argued that the type of voter enthusiasm that drove his win in New Hampshire is what Democrats need in November, saying that Democrats win when voter turnout is high and Republicans win when voter turnout is low.
Otherwise it was a fairly standard Sanders speech. He hit, among other issues: income inequality, campaign finance, veterans’ issues and mass incarceration. Sanders also spoke directly to his young supporters, who polls show prefer him to Clinton, addressing social justice issues, jobs and criticizing the costs associated with obtaining a college education.
David Wasserman
The bad news for Bush at the moment is that he’s in danger of being edged out for third place by Ted Cruz. Curiously, Cruz’s slight surge into third seems to be fueled by strong showings in Strafford County, especially around Rochester along the Maine border. Perhaps not coincidentally, these were also some of Rick Santorum’s best towns in the 2012 primary. A week ago, Bush backers would have been ecstatic about finishing ahead of Marco Rubio. But finishing behind John Kasich and Cruz could take a lot of the luster off.
Julia Azari
Sanders Stakes Out His Ground
Sanders’s speech emphasized the power of the people and the idea that when turnout is high, progressives win. He’s also made a point to talk about the need for eventual party unity and has moved on to attacking Republicans. But as this was going on, I got this tweet:
https://twitter.com/rumdoodle/status/697245413158465536
Now, New Hampshire and Iowa determine fewer than 100 delegates combined. It’s very early to talk about what the Democratic primary electorate wants. But Sanders and his supporters may walk a fine line here: If Clinton wins in a way that liberal activists see as illegitimate, that could be a real mess.
Jody Avirgan
The TV Dance From Inside The Hall
CONCORD, N.H. —
The press, and crowd, await John Kasich.
Jody Avirgan
It’s no secret that on election night the candidates do a bit of a scheduling dance to make sure their speeches end up on TV. But it’s still strange to watch the Kasich party come close to starting the speech and then back off several times. Lots of big cheers and chants that sort of peter out as it becomes clear that their candidate isn’t going to take the stage after all. I overheard one Kasich staffer say, “We thought we could squeeze in between Hillary and Bernie. Now we have to wait, and Trump may start soon.” A surprise second place may feel nice, but I guess it doesn’t buy you the cred to command your own network attention.
Farai Chideya
I know I’m putting the cart way before the horse, but it’s hard to imagine who would win the Veepstakes if tonight’s New Hampshire winners got their party’s nomination. Ken Rudin did this analysis of which historical POTUS/Veep partnerships worked well and which failed. Sanders, who has framed himself as a barnstorming socialist Democrat, could face a backlash if he chooses someone too middle of the road. He might need that tactically, but it could alienate his base. For Trump, his choice may be almost immaterial, but it seems unlikely that it would be any of the guys he’s been sharing a debate stage with. Clinton, who framed her speech tonight around core progressive issues, would probably do well by following the typical Veepstakes rules (one of them: go older if you’re young, and vice versa; another: pick a powerful, well-liked governor of a swing state), as would a GOP establishment candidate like Bush.
Nate Silver
Prediction markets have Bush’s chances of winning the Republican nomination up by quite a bit. I suppose that makes sense given how poor a night it’s been for Rubio (and to a lesser extent, Christie). But still: Bush has just 11 percent of the vote so far with a third of New Hampshire precincts reporting. This in a state where Bush has invested a ton of time and money and which is a pretty good fit for him ideologically. If Rubio hadn’t disappointed so much by comparison, this result would look like a pretty big failure for Bush.
On the contested convention question: Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada are the setup, but the real delegate prizes are in March, which is do-or-die time. That’s why South Carolina and Nevada are the last best opportunity for anti-Trump/Cruz voters to coalesce. If they don’t, it’s unlikely that Rubio/Bush/Kasich will hit important delegate thresholds in the South-heavy “SEC primary” March 1 and then it would be unlikely that Rubio/Bush/Kasich win must-win, winner-take-all states Florida, Illinois and Ohio on March 15. If South Carolina and Nevada don’t make up for New Hampshire’s failure to clarify the establishment field, the odds of a contested convention go up dramatically.
Well, we’ve made our share of stupid predictions over the course of this election cycle. But the 20 percent odds I gave for a contested convention back in December are starting to look pretty good! The thing is, even if Republicans eventually consolidate around an establishment alternative, it may take them some time to do so. Meanwhile, Trump and Cruz are going to be piling up delegates. And it’s not like Trump and Cruz’s support is going to crater to zero if someone emerges later on — they represent important constituencies within the party.
Micah Cohen
Interesting question from commenter Josh Edge: “Could the fight on the GOP side feasibly make it to the convention floor? Or will the party eventually coalesce behind a single anti-Trump candidate?”
Perhaps it shouldn’t be too surprising given Sanders’s lack of history with the Democratic Party, but he is doing far better with undeclared voters than he is with registered Democrats. Although he leads 72 percent to 27 percent over Clinton among undeclared voters, Sanders is tied with Clinton at 49 percent among registered Democrats. That could paint trouble for Sanders in closed primaries, when only registered Democrats can vote.
Anne Li
Candidate Watch: Clinton
Clinton just finished her concession speech, and harking back to Obama’s 2008 campaign theme, she spoke about “change” a lot. But despite her loss to Sanders, it appeared that she was more focused on setting herself apart from her Republican counterparts, expressing her support for “human rights” — calling out “women rights,” “gay rights,” “voter rights,” etc. — than she was on setting herself apart from Sanders.
Julia Azari
Where Have You Gone, Party Elders?
On Twitter, a reader asks how a Rubio-Kasich-Bush stalemate ends and suggests:
@julia_azari@farai Once upon a time, party elders would've made phone calls to suggest this…who are they now? Bush Sr? W? Mitt? LOL?
Jokes about the individuals aside, I think this is a really important point. The fraying of party ties and formal organizations and the ways in which presidents can independently cultivate political support have contributed to this situation. This is the result of an increasingly powerful and public presidency. It’s also an unintended consequence of party reform. The party networks people mention that groups like super PACs play the same role party elders once did. But I maintain that party organizations, which are interested in the party’s viability from year to year, and the related groups that make up their networks have different incentives. And their methods of sanctioning candidates who don’t get in line are coming up short.
