The Dixville analysis

[windansea]

In 2000:

23 Republicans and six Democrats voted in Dixville Notch on Tuesday morning: Bush, the governor of Texas and son of former President George Bush, claimed 12 GOP ballots to edge out Arizona Sen. John McCain.

On the Democratic side, Bradley beat Vice President Al Gore by a 2-1 margin -- four votes to two.

http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/02/01/dixville.notch/

In 2004

Clark won Dixville with 8 votes. Sen. John Kerry had 3, Sen. John Edwards 2 and Howard Dean and Sen. Joe Lieberman 1 each...for a total of 15 DEM VOTES

Bush/Cheney received 14 votes

There are no registered Democrats in Dixville Notch, population 33, and just five in Hart's Location, which has 39 residents. But state law allows independents to register with a party at the polling place and vote in its primary. Most of Dixville Notch's 16 independents and Hart's 14 were expected to vote in the Democratic primary.

See the diference from 2000 to 2004?

In 2000 23 pub votes 6 dem

In 2004 15 dem votes 14 pub votes....that's quite a big change

What's it mean??? It's good news for Dems in general, and it also shows that CLARK CAN CHANGE PUBS AND INDIES INTO DEM VOTERS!!

ps...NH results are up on Drudge

YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!

[SahaleArm]

1. In 2000 90% of Independents voted in the Republican primary.

McCain won over 90% of those votes.

[windansea]

2. it's only a tiny hamlet

but it bodes well for :dem:

[SahaleArm]

24. The point is Independents outnumber Dems 3:2 in NH...

No poll has taken that into account.

[windansea]

3. kick n/t

[VincentHamm]

4. Well, that's a very interesting analysis.

Was that Drudge's analysis as well?

[_Jumper_]

5. roflmao

:yourock:

[windansea]

6. no...he just linked to apnews

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040127/D80AVGIG0.html

[overground1]

14. Hamm is the man!

confessions of a Hamm hawk.

[_Jumper_]

7. 2000

In 2000 the GOP primary was the "hot race". This year the Democratic race is. I think that accounts for the change.

[windansea]

8. LOL

yeah...that's gotta be the reason

:eyes:

[windansea]

13. ok..how bout 1992

dems or pubs the hot race??


hmmmmmmmmm??

[overground1]

15. Both. Pat Buchanan gave Bush Sr a strong early run and won New Hampshire.

[windansea]

31. it kind of shows

that this years results do show a dramatic increase in dem votes and not just because this year the dem primary is "hotter'

[Adjoran]

9. Jumper is right

In 2000, BOTH parties had primaries, and the repubs had the more interesting contest. Those are heavily repub precincts.

Dixville Notch is meaningless in years like this when it is the Democratic race that's contested (not that they are all that meaningful to the repubs either).

The only thing that can be definitively said about it is Clark got some free publicity at the end of the campaign. Even that isn't so much in NH, where most voters have met the guy they are voting for, and probably several of the others. The number of people who decide because "Wow, Marge! Clark kicked butt in Dixville Notch!" are probably about as many as vote there.

[windansea]

10. actually

The voters of Dixville Notch traditionally cast ballots in the New Hampshire primary just after midnight. The town's voters have correctly chosen the eventual Republican nominee every year since 1968.

I'll have to see if I can find the records...but I have a feeling that Dixville has never has more Dem votes than pubbies in a primary before...and if so then it can't be explained by who has the "hot" primary alone.

You guys must of missed the part of my post where I said this is good news for all dems...or maybe not :shrug:

[Awsi Dooger]

11. Completely irrelevant other than a nice morning blurb for Clark

My job is statistical analysis on Excel. Even if these were all lifelong Democrats the sample size is so puny a margin for error could not be calculated.

As an example, check out the front page of Politics & Campaigns right now. It is dominated by threads on Dennis Kucinich, including five in a row at one stage. Placing any meaning in tonight's vote tallies is like some political novice clicking into Politics & Campaigns and concluding that Dennis Kucinich is the certain Democratic nominee.

[windansea]

12. ok analyze this

in 1992...a hotly contested Dem primary...Clinton won the sole 3 dem votes cast....while Bush got 9 and Buchannon 3

Thats as far back as I could find records for...but I have a feeling that Dixville has never voted more dem than pub in any primary

That was the main point of my post.

Dixville may be statistically insignificant but they have correctly predicted the the eventual republican nominee since 1968....that's better than any pollster I know of.

[Awsi Dooger]

16. The post had value, the political makeup of those areas

I thank you for it, having missed the TV coverage until the voting began. Only 5 Democrats in 70+ residents tells me plenty about that area of New Hampshire.

A tiny sample of sports results (which I analyze) CAN be valid and representative longterm, but equally as many samples will not be. I wouldn't have any confidence embracing Dixville results unless a pattern held up for 50 years, maybe more.

[overground1]

17. analysis:

Buchanan was a serious contender and most Republicans wanted a say in the matter, particularly in the early states. The analysis for this little Hamm-let is that the Republicans there were strongly in support of Bush Sr. over Buchanan, even though Buchanan went on to win that primary.

Further more significant analysis:
These guys suck at predicting contested races in New Hamm-shire.
Whoever wins here will surely lose the state primary.

This is very bad news for Clark, but bodes well for Vincent Hamm.

[windansea]

18. but Dixville has predicted the eventual NOMINEE

for repubs since 1968....that's a bit more important than who wins a puny little primary....find me a pollster who has done this since 1968....the Hamm jokes are getting old...reminds me of Lieberman night here a few weeks ago

I don't think Clark will win NH...but he might do better than the pollsters predict

[overground1]

19. you've totally swerved from the original point of your post

You were trying to advance a theory that Republicans are switching to Democrats. Of course if that was the case then they would have just re-registered as Democrats already. Which they didn't. The number of Democrats dropped off from 5 to zero.

These guys were all just voting for who they thought was the weakest of the viable candidates. Which explains why Clark won.

[windansea]

21. heh heh...I knew this was coming

actually these dem voters were registered independents...who could have been pubs or dems before

if they were freeping the vote...they wouldn't have picked Clark

[overground1]

20. Dixville has predicted the Republican nominee since 1968; so if Clark wins

the nomination does this prove that he is indeed a Republican?

[Awsi Dooger]

22. Nice jab

Reminds me a little bit of a political cartoon (Doonesbury?) post-2002 election. It showed a TV commentator reminding that the party which wins the presidential election is certain to lose seats in the subsequent midterm, then had Gore ranting and raving, "See there, I told you I won!"

[windansea]

23. they picked Clinton in 92

you know...that 2 term Democratic President who calls Clark one of the stars of the democratic party..but I'm sure you know better than old big dog does...:)

[overground1]

25. yes, Clinton, the man Michael Moore calls "the best Republican President"

sorry, I got distracted. So where were you..?
Praising NAFTA and welfare reform, right?

[windansea]

26. I 'm just havin some fun

Let's see...Michael Moore endorses......Clark

must be confusing for you...perhaps you should write Bill and Mike and ask them why they like Clark.

[KaraokeKarlton]

27. It means that Bush doesn't have any serious challenger

So some of the people who will vote for Bush in November decided to vote in the Democratic primary instead.

[HootieMcBoob]

28. Not to over analyze it but

One interpretation could be that there are a good percentage of disgruntled republicans out there who don't want bush* in the white house anymore. They've voted for the candidate that is most attractive to independent voters. And many democrats like him too. He will win the general election in a landslide. Not to overanalyze :)

[windansea]

30. very insightful HM

as Dixville goes....so goes the nation

heh heh :)

[overground1]

33. That doesn't bode well for us - Bush still got the most votes in Dixville

[kerryistheanswer]

29. Sorry but it looks bad for Clark in NH

I predict a fourth place, possibly fifth in NH. Anything but third would be a huge dissapoint considering he skipped Iowa.

[windansea]

32. the Dixville bounce

will be HUGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!