Category: new hampshire

The VoxWife and I cast our ballots this morning. There was one vote for Senator McCain and one vote for Senator Obama. It seems like that's where a lot of people are today. Consider the end of this article in The New York Times today:

In the Republican ranks, Mr. McCain, 71, is a curious bookend to Mr. Obama. He is the oldest candidate in either party besides Ron Paul, another Republican, who is 72. Yet he draws hundreds of young people at some events.

Mr. McCain drew many hundreds when he spoke at Dartmouth, a number exceeded only by the 2,000 students who showed up for Mr. Obama.

“He is seen as Washington but not in it,” said Ronald G. Shaiko, an associate director of the Nelson A. Rockefeller Center at Dartmouth who works with focus groups. “They think he’ll upset the apple cart.”

Mr. McCain admits to admiring Mr. Obama’s appeal as a “wonderful thing” and has taken to borrowing a line or three. He has been channeling Mr. Obama, calling on Americans to “serve a cause greater than their self-interest,” a theme from his campaign in 2000.

At forums, he may hand the microphone to a young man with ONE, a group dedicated to eradicating what it calls “stupid poverty” and disease. The group has more than 17,000 members in New Hampshire.

At Dartmouth, Emily Goodell, 18, sat astride a strange fence, contemplating a vote for Mr. McCain or Mr. Obama.

“It is kind of a strange thing since they have different views on many of the issues,” Ms. Goodell said. “They come across as genuine. I trust them.”

Nearly as striking is the absence of young people on the trail traveled by Mitt Romney and Rudolph W. Giuliani. Mr. Romney visited Dartmouth, but the earth did not shake.

“He went straight to the medical school,” Professor Shaiko said. “He wanted to talk to adults. He has no presence here.”

Still, the youth vote has an uncertain mojo. For the moment, Mr. Obama is like catnip for many people younger than 30. Less certain is if his “it moment” will be sustained.

The results of the Rockefeller Center focus group before the Democratic debate in September at Dartmouth may be instructive. Mr. Obama’s stock dropped after he stood shoulder to shoulder with more experienced rivals.

“His talking about his work in the state legislature while another candidate is talking about negotiating with the North Koreans was a turnoff,” Professor Shaiko said. “They found him coming up short on experience.”

It has been an interesting turnaround for Senator Obama in those three months, and it has been equally interesting to see this aura emerge around him and Senator McCain. It does not seem to have much to do with the two parties, either. The longest line at the polling place was still the one to change affiliations back to undeclared.

Senator McCain included Dartmouth on this weekend's slate of town hall meetings, speaking to a capacity crowd in Alumni Hall last evening. I may not agree with him on some issues, but there's no arguing that he's an authentic statesman with a record in public service that does merit presidential consideration. That experience puts him in select company in this campaign. It was nice to see so many students at the event. Several of them asked good questions.

The event focused on two topics, the war in Iraq and federal spending. On both of these topics, McCain began with a sincere acknowledgement that it has been Republicans in the majority who have made major mistakes. On the war, McCain pinned the blame on Rumsfeld and insisted that the "surge" strategy was working. In response to a question by a student, however, I think McCain stumbled a bit in trying to describe how the war would eventually come to an end. Is it nothing more than we leave and declare victory when the troops are home? I don't think the Republicans, even the authentic ones, will have much chance for electoral success until they can paint a picture of a successful end to the war.

On federal spending, McCain linked runaway spending to corruption and the jail time now being served by former members of Congress. He sounds really good when he's talking about this, but he showed no signs of addressing my big frustration with federal spending. Does he really think we can close the budget deficit only by eliminating pork barrel projects? If so, then he must think that a big chunk of the defense budget is pork. He must think that plenty of health-related and entitlement spending is pork. And if that's the case, then he shouldn't tell me about a $233 million bridge to nowhere. He should be telling me about $233 billion (or more) in cuts that he's willing to make. And, of course, he cannot combine silence on that with the combination of "not wanting to raise your taxes" and "needing to spend more on defense." I've heard worse, but I still would have liked a bit more "straight talk" on the budget. If he were saying that, I'd be working for him.

Overall, a great event. As John Gregg wrote in his recent "Primary Sources" column for The Valley News, the Republican candidates have passed through this area, but they haven't had much of a presence. So it was particularly nice to see one stand up and answer direct questions.

UPDATE: An article from the student paper on the event.

It was fascinating to have a ringside seat at last night's debate. I got to meet all of the candidates and make some remarks in the pre-program, which was televised only on NECN but not MSNBC. NECN has some clips here, and the New York Times has this interesting transcript analyzer. For local coverage, see the story in The Dartmouth and this image gallery.

The Rockefeller Center ran a focus group, some results of which are reported here. The headline is right--it was hard to see any positive outcome for Senator Obama:

Laughing at the candidates’ skirmishes and one-liners but engaging in serious discourse on the their merits, Dartmouth students identified Illinois Sen. Barack Obama as the biggest loser of Wednesday’s debate — but couldn’t agree on a winner — in a focus group moderated by government professor Ron Shaiko, a senior fellow and associate director of the Rockefeller Center.

Given how much I enjoyed his trip to Dartmouth in May and seeing his campaign's visibility yesterday morning (to say nothing of the generally favorable things I've written about him), I was astonished to find myself wondering during the event whether he was still campaigning for the top spot. I initially thought that he was suffering from simply less airtime than in previous events, but the Dodd-clock shows that he still got as much as anyone but Senator Clinton.

In general, I think that Senator Biden and Congressman Kucinich did the best for themselves, but Senator Clinton simply won by not losing. The greatest irony of the night was Senator Gravel accusing other folks of living in Fantasy Land. That's rich. My biggest lesson of the day was that Tim Russert is an extremely talented moderator. With him at the podium, there was no need for gimmicks.

For the best write-up I've read, see this piece by Reid Wilson at Real Clear Politics, my first interview in the Spin Room.

Tonight, the Rockefeller Center and its partners on campus will host a nationally televised debate among the Democratic candidates for President. It airs live tonight on MSNBC.

Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Julia Steers of MSNBC have posted their "First Read." They note:

A brand-new CNN/WMUR poll finds her [Senator Clinton] with a 23-point lead over Obama in New Hampshire (43%-20%). Back in July, her lead was nine points (36%-27%). With that kind of advantage, and with about three months until the early nominating contests begin, doesn’t each debate become more and more important for the candidates chasing her?

You wouldn't know about that lead in the polls from the early morning visibility around Hanover. Dropping off our son at kindergarten this morning, it was all Obama, all the time, with all four corners of the intersection at Wheelock and Park Streets boasting Obama supporters. I think the chase is on--we'll know more this evening.