Clinton's numbers rose as Edwards' slipped

[Adelante]

I see so often on DU the assumption made that Edwards support would naturally move to Obama, as they form some sort of anti-Clinton bloc. I have always doubted this. Stuart Rothenberg backs up my speculation in a look at New Hampshire results.

While some will suggest that Sen. Hillary Clinton’s New Hampshire victory can be traced to her emotional comments shortly before the primary, and others will credit Bill Clinton, there is some evidence to suggest that the collapse of the John Edwards campaign in the Granite State may have given Clinton a victory that multiple polls promised would go to Sen. Barack Obama.

Edwards’s weak 17% showing in New Hampshire was a significant drop from his 30% finish in Iowa just a few days earlier. (It’s probably more accurate to conclude that Edwards drew 23% or 24% in Iowa, not 30%, since that’s what the Iowa entrance poll found. Edwards undoubtedly benefited in the caucuses from realignment, which boosted his final percentage past Clinton, though more people went into the caucuses saying that they would support her. Still, Edwards’s 6-point drop between the Iowa entrance poll and the New Hampshire exit poll is worth noting.)

It’s not that Edwards is unpopular with his party’s voters. A solid 79% of New Hampshire Democratic primary voters had a favorable opinion of him, and many said that he “cares about people.”

But exit polling from New Hampshire shows that the former North Carolina senator flopped with a number of groups that, given the tone and message of his campaign, he should have scored with – groups with which Clinton made noteworthy gains.

-snip

It would be reasonable to assume that Edwards’s former supporters would switch to Obama, the other “change” candidate in the race, and the Democrats who seemed to have momentum going into New Hampshire. But that apparently didn’t happen.

Instead, it was Clinton whose numbers generally rose as Edwards’s slipped.

Entire article

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/01/09/did_edwards_slip_help_clinton_in_new_hampshire.html

[ORDagnabbit]

1. so why....

if we break it out into two sections. 1. is hand counted ballots and the 2 is machine tabulated ballots

1. all hand counted ballots = obama win

and

2. machine tabulated ballots = obama loss

[sampsonblk]

2. Good points. That's why I don't think race was a major factor.

It could be that Edwards' collapse was brought about by Clinton's tears. He was the main attacker at times. Maybe some voters got sick of that and switched to Hillary.

Either way, it wasn't about race. In my opinion.

[jackson_dem]

5. Edwards averaged 18% in New Hampshire polls

He got 17%. There was no collapse. This may be another establishment meme designed to hurt Edwards when he is on the ropes.

[sampsonblk]

11. That's not what I saw

I saw polls with Obama near 38%, with Clinton and Edwards battling for second place near 28%.

[jackson_dem]

12. Which poll was that?

Edwards was never higher than 23% in a New Hampshire poll and even in that one he was ten points behind Hillary and eleven behind Obama. http://www.pollster.com/08-NH-Dem-Pres-Primary.php for an archive of New Hampshire polls.

[jackson_dem]

3. What collapse?

Edwards did as well as polls leading up the vote showed and he did better than he was polling all of 2007 in the Granite State, as well as better than he did in 2003 and 2004.

[cali]

4. He got very little out of his 2nd in Iowa- about 2%

[Kahuna]

6. You're probably right. I never thought Edward's supporters would

to to Obama. Not after what I've witnessed on DU.

[quinnox]

7. This is also what I have thought

The DU conventional wisdom is wrong, IMHO. Supposedly, most of Edwards supporters would go to Obama according to it. But on the contrary, people who support Edwards tend to be lower income and union, traditional Dem groups, which is Hillary's strength, and these would be much more likely to go to Hillary then Obama. Obama tends to get the upper income college graduate crowd.

[jenmito]

8. I think it was this time only because Edwards made a mean comment about her tearing up...

and women who WERE going to vote for Edwards switched to Hillary out of anger at Edwards and sympathy for Hillary.

[jackson_dem]

9. And Edwards went from 18% to 17% as a result?

People are confusing Iowa with New Hampshire. Edwards was never at 30% in New Hampshire.

[laureloak]

10. No he didnt. He said he wasn't going to comment on it

because he knew nothing about it. Then he talked about how strong a President has to be. The liars only talked about the 2nd part.