Columnist Jack Davies discusses the New Hampshire primary.
Ah, New Hampshire: the U.S.’s laboratory of democracy. With some of the most liberal voting laws in the nation, including a ridiculously low signature requirement to appear on the ballot for president, New Hampshire and its political matters seem to be a little … out there.
So imagine my surprise Tuesday morning when the first votes were cast at the traditional show opener of Dixville Notch, New Hampshire. The polls at the snowed-in hamlet on the Canadian border opened just after midnight, with the Republicans choosing moderate but insomnia-curing John Kasich as their choice followed by Donald Trump. The Democrats unanimously endorsed Bernie Sanders.
Now it’s important to know the events in Dixville Notch are weird, just like everything else politically speaking in the state. It has a tradition of voting at midnight every election since 1960 in the ballroom of its stately resort hotel, closing the polls when the staggering electoral population of nine people are finished and then broadcasting the results on television immediately after.
The Kasich campaign victory in the small town is certainly something to raise eyebrows at. With little media coverage, no "flashy" policies and the charisma level of an insecure wet paper bag, John Kasich is not front-running presidential material. His strong budget cuts leading to a surplus of $2 billion for Ohio make him popular among fiscal conservatives and some former Rand Paul supporters. What I do find surprising is the absolute endorsement of Bernie from the Democratic voters of the town, suggesting that Hillary Clinton’s campaign may be embarrassed by the end of Tuesday, as Sanders leads by 13.3 points, according to the latest Real Clear Politics Poll.
I certainly would caution people from reading too much into either the polls or the results of Dixville Notch. New Hampshire is a notoriously difficult place to poll, as four out of 10 voters are registered independents who, by state law, can choose their side on the day of the primary, meaning that the “temperature” and composition of a party's electorate can change rapidly.
We know Donald Trump is anxious, wondering if he can turn the support shown in massive Trump rallies into electoral results after falling behind in Iowa. Rubio is trying to recover from his disappointing debate performance when he sounded like a broken answering machine. The electoral results of vicious insult slogging between candidates has yet to be seen, with Trump and Bush viciously trading personal jibes at each other, with the former continuing his usual class act by calling Bush a "desperate," "sad" and "pathetic" person.
Democrats have also seen their fair share of controversy with Bill Clinton attacking Bernie Sanders' supporters for their “vicious" and "sexist" trolling of the Clinton campaign. I must say that such a statement is a little rich coming from Bill Clinton of all people, but the Hillary Clinton campaign has shown signs of trouble that have resulted in a rumored shift in leadership, which the campaign vehemently denies.
{{tncms-asset app="editorial" id="fb168aa0-c47b-11e5-9e0e-5fc2ffde8ddb"}}
Because of the strong tradition of independent voting and the rapidly changing nature of the state’s political climate, I cannot claim to predict the outcome of the New Hampshire primary with any real degree of accuracy. Though I do believe with all of the conflict now seen between Democratic candidates, Sen. Sanders will inch past Hillary Clinton. Among Republicans, I really don’t have a clue, though Trump said he "wouldn’t be happy" if he lost. I hope that means he’ll drop out. Here’s hoping.
Jack Davies is a sophomore studying philosophy and the Honors Tutorial College senator in Student Senate. What do you think of Trump's jabs at Bush? Email him at jd814213@ohio.edu.
