News Sections
Clinton victory reignites race to White House
CTV News Video
|
Watch: See all Videos in the Player
A A |
Email
|
Print
| Comments (64)
| Add Comments
Tweet
CTV.ca News Staff
Date: Wed. Jan. 9 2008 7:10 PM ET
Hillary Clinton's narrow but stunning upset victory over Barack Obama in the Democratic New Hampshire primary Tuesday has shaken up the race to the White House.
On Wednesday, Clinton's camp said the win has revived its fundraising campaign, which has raised more than US$750,000 since her late night win. But Obama also bounced back, with two major union endorsements that many political pundits say will likely help him win the Nevada caucuses on January 19.
The New Hampshire results will also lead to a competitive race in South Carolina a week later. Unlike New Hampshire, the state has a large African-American population, which could change the dynamics of the race for the leadership of the Democratic Party.
But African-American votes will not necessarily go to Obama because he's a black candidate, says Peter Beinhart of The New Republic.
"The Clintons have enormous reservoirs of support in the black community," Beinhart told CTV Newsnet's Mike Duffy Live.
"Remember Toni Morrison, the African-American novelist, famously called Bill Clinton America's first black president. (The Clintons) have a very deep and long history with the African-American community."
Beinhart said the New Hampshire win has revived what many had predicted was a dying Clinton campaign.
Clinton's victory in the Granite State could lead to a long Democratic leadership race, says a U.S. presidential historian.
"This could go all the way to South Dakota in June," Allan Lichtman told Canada AM on Tuesday.
Polls before Tuesday's vote gave Obama, winner of last week's Iowa caucuses, a lead of up to 13 points over Clinton, who finished third in that contest.
In New Hampshire, Clinton, a New York senator, emerged with 39 per cent of the vote. Obama captured 37 per cent, and former North Carolina senator John Edwards captured about 17 per cent.
Lichtman said Clinton won on the strength of her support among women voters.
"The women came home," he said. "Hillary Clinton yesterday made history by becoming the first woman in American history to win a major party primary, and she did it with the women.
"She was 12 points ahead or so among women voters, 11 points behind among male voters, and therein lies her victory."
Lichtman, who teaches at American University in Washington, D.C., said primaries are notoriously difficult to poll accurately, and there may have been a late surge after Clinton showed a more human side on Monday.
At a campaign event in Portsmouth, she was asked how she kept going. Clinton declared -- with her eyes welling up and voice breaking -- that this race "is very personal for me. It's not just political.
"Some of us put ourselves out there and do this against some pretty difficult odds and we do it, each one of us, because we care about our country," she said. "But some of us are right and some of us are wrong. Some of us are ready and some of us are not."
Lichtman said if Clinton shows herself as a real person and not as an "ice lady," she will be a formidable candidate in the primaries to come.
He thinks it has now become a two-candidate race between Clinton and Obama, the rookie senator from Illinois.
While there have been arguments about whether he's helped or hurt his wife's campaign, Lichtman said Bill Clinton -- the two-term Democratic president -- is the outstanding Democratic politician of these times.
"Never underestimate the persuasive power of Bill Clinton," he said.
Obama drew huge crowds in New Hampshire, but he didn't achieve the same degree of dominance among young voters there that he did in Iowa, according to an Associated Press analysis.
In New Hampshire, undeclared voters could vote in either the Republican or Democratic primaries, and huge numbers of them voted for Arizona Sen. John McCain, which means they couldn't vote for Obama.
While Obama did well among independents, Clinton did slightly better with New Hampshire's independents than she did with the ones in Iowa.
Clinton also benefited more from "late deciders" in New Hampshire than she did in Iowa.
After Nevada and South Carolina, all of the campaigns will gear up for what's being called "Tsunami Tuesday," the day that voters in more than 20 states will go to primary polls.
The Republicans
McCain -- whose campaign seemed moribund during the summer of 2007 -- didn't put much effort into Iowa, but did pull out the stops in New Hampshire, where he won the 2000 primary.
On Tuesday night, the 71-year-old captured 37 per cent of the vote. Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney was second with 32 per cent. Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee -- the Iowa winner -- was third with 11 per cent and former New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani came in fourth with nine per cent.
Beinhart said that a seemingly improving situation in Iraq and the fact that the immigration debate "has cooled a little bit" helped McCain's campaign.
Lichtman noted that the Republican race is still just as unpredictable as the Democratic one.
"Let's not again make the mistake that one swallow makes the spring," he said. "How well is McCain going to play in the South? He could even lose to (Mitt) Romney in Michigan (on Jan. 15)."
Huckabee, a Baptist minister, won in Iowa where there was three times the number of evangelical voters as in New Hampshire, AP said.
While McCain did very well among independents in New Hampshire, independents can't vote in the Republican primary in South Carolina. McCain lost there to George Bush in 2000.
South Carolina's primary is on Jan. 19, with Florida following on Jan. 29.
Giuliani plans to focus on Florida, while former senator and "Law and Order" star Fred Thompson is focusing on South Carolina. Both men barely campaigned in New Hampshire.
The Republicans will also have a Super Tuesday on Feb. 5.
With files from The Associated Press
User Tools
Related Stories
CTV.ca Special
Most Popular
Most Viewed News Stories
Most Talked about Stories
Perhaps they should look at reducing duties resellers must pay for products coming from the US to Canada in order to level the field? Then it would be prudent for the resellers to offer competitive pricing and good service to maintain a loyal customer base.

Add New Comment ( )
DAVID
0
said
0
Art
0
said
0
Kevin
0
said
0
Sam
0
said
0
Joe Jackson
0
said
0
go to ronpaulwarroom dot com
Does anyone know what a Diebold Voting Machine is???
Anyone know Greg Palast (a real journalist)??? -- He exposed vote fraud in 2004 Presidential Elections
dave
0
said
0
Lance
0
said
0
He's the only one that can save the US from the disaster that it's in.
Butters Leopold Scotch
0
said
0
Hillary? She's the devil, plain and simple.
Whatever happens, they'll be handing some A+ material to the writers of The Daily Show and The Colbert Report. Is that really what America wants... more overpaid Hollywood writers getting a free ride? I think not.
Jeff S.
0
said
0
It goes to show what lengths of manipulation she will attempt to become the next U.S. President.
I would suggest that she was able to make herself cry so easily because of the pummelling she took from Obama in Iowa last week. For the first time, she realized that 8 years of campaigning might not garner that which she feels entitled to and she broke down. That she could use this emotion to make women voters feel sorry for her and then win their votes should give everyone a taste of her true style.
Imagine if it was Romney or Edwards that became emotional after a loss and cried on TV the next day! Either one would have sunk any chance they had at winning because the electorate would have seen how they can crack under pressure. But because Hillary is a woman, she gets the sympathy of the voters and the media.
It is this kind of sexist, double standard that should make a lot of U.S. men wary of voting for Mrs. Clinton.
Laura
0
said
0
Lart from Above
0
said
0
I don't think voters either care or mind very much when a politician shows an ordinary human emotion. Sometimes the voters are smarter than the bloggers.
kt
0
said
0
As to Hillary’s tears, crocodile or not – no one can know. However it is a fact that upon identical emotional stimuli, the female had a predisposed biological response to differently receive and process the message, as well as create tears, and this response is quite often physiologically uncontrollable. To behave otherwise requires training, which often authoritative females have practiced - but still. It is the spin society has placed on this emotional demonstration that leads us to believe Hillary is a “softie”, when really any other candidate may feel the same. Personally though, perhaps unfortunately, due to the global stigma of the female tendencies and Hillary’s tendency to giggle inappropriately, as well as Obama’s charismatic and composed nature, I believe Obama would be better able to positively influence Global policies. I may or may not be right – but that is my opinion.
Dabny
0
said
0
Our tax levels reflect the services that are provided in the social democratic model we've adopted. The levies provide the components of our social safety net whereas the US is running deficits/debts because they are overspending on military issues while being adverse to paying any taxes.
To Gary,
Our fascination with US politics is akin to being perversely curious about Britney Spears. Both are train wrecks that are interesting to watch.
Darren Alexander
0
said
0
It's going to be very interesting going down the stretch. It's only the second week of January. I think the eventual GOP candidate vs the Dem one is going to look good. Giuiliani and McCain will be running mates I think. Lots of experience there. Not much on the Dem side.
Lart from Above
0
said
0
Republican policy seems to be paranoid pre-emptive war in the Middle East, xenophobic immigration policies, incompetent government finance with huge deficits, and inattention to trade disputes. Bill Clinton was a hundred times better for Canada than George II Bush, and any future Democratic president would similarly be better for Canada.
Anyway, things have been slow on Parliament Hill lately. As soon as confidence votes come close, Duffy will start stirring the pot and the bloggers will talk about Harper and Dion again.
Matt
0
said
0
Liberals and Conservatives aren't the same as the Democrats and Republicans. Canadian politics is generally more left leaning and the parties reflect that.
Look at the platforms, look at the actual laws they pass.
Eric
0
said
0
Does anyone else find this a little offputting? People like that condemn others for not voting for someone based on their gender or color of their skin, but will look at those exact same qualities when -they- decide to promote a candidate. Preach their policies, not their physical characteristics. Voting for Clinton as a 'step forward for women everywhere' and no other reason is a step back for Democracy.
Scott M
0
said
0
The comments from Gary are relevant. We Canadians are always self-righteous about the USA but I wonder how we would feel if the US scrutinized our elections
and political process!
Bryan (Saskatchewan)
0
said
0
Gaetan Perreault
0
said
0
You struck a nerve because you must be the only American who reads Canadian news. No wonder we went at you.
Gates
Agent SPEED
0
said
0
It's because we actually take interest in the world affairs. Our intelligence gives us the ability to be knowledgeable and our minds are curious and accepting.
Aside from that, we are also properly educated.
M-J
0
said
0
Also, New Hampshire a few weeks ago, was poised to sweep her into #1.Doesn't look that way to me
Cayt
0
said
0
And Gary from New Jersey, you really should use a dictionary and check your facts. We're pretty sophisticated up here. All in good humour of course.
Sunny Day - Not S.A.D.
0
said
0
Also, we don't have to register our affiliation prior to casting ballots given that there are 5 plus parties depending on riding(district)at the National level.
I guess the religious folk didn't roll out for the Huckster... don't shed a tear for me
Robert
0
said
0
While we observe and comment, at least the Canadian Ambassador to the United States won't publicly state that one of your candidates should 'watch his mouth.'
We observe, we don't participate or attempt to manipulate the results, unlike your government's involvement in elections in other countries.
JAY
0
said
0
NO MORE BUSH!! I really think he hurt the American people and thank god he will never get the chance in office again. What a mess he has caused.
Gail
0
said
0
Does anyone even know what they're policies are? Canadians should care about who wins if we want to maintain a strong standard of living.
Peter (Montreal)
0
said
0
It certainly helps us to keep believing "American" can be a very bad word indeed.
Jacqueline
0
said
0
Allan Eizinas
0
said
0
To be president you have to learn to fake sincerity.
She has a good chance.
Chris
0
said
0
I don't know what scares the American male, but what scares me (a Canadian male) is her protectionist streak.
If you think Canada's manufacturing industries are having a tough time now with the high dollar, just wait until the new President Clinton starts "re-negotiating" the NAFTA agreement.
Scary things could definitely happen if a protectionist wins that election.
Lori
0
said
0
J-F (Ottawa)
0
said
0
Thank you for visiting and commenting on our Canadian CTV news site. It seems you have quite the Canadian interest yourself.
Anne
0
said
0
david
0
said
0
Ed
0
said
0
Vahan
0
said
0
Chris
0
said
0
Gary
0
said
0
Don't blame me if you need to look south all the time for acceptance. We love ya nevertheless, now go to your room :)
Gary, NJ
PS could someone edit my script for spelling and punctuation please:). I can just see thge response I'm gonna get over this should it get posted. All in good humour friends to the north
B. Gray
0
said
0
Now to Shamaro, I am not sure why you think taking Chrétien & Harper's cabinets are the model that the US should live by. I'm not saying theirs' is better, but I am not sure our system is either. Canada's surplus is being driven by record Oil profits, and our very high income & personal tax levels. If the US began to levy a 50% tax on all their citizens, then they too could have a record surplus. It's a fine line between good governing and extortion. =)
Politics? Bah Humbug!
0
said
0
Secondly, lolol, but Canadians have a better choice with the Liberals and the Conservatives!?!?! HA! Canadians are in the same boat..same politicians, differents political names...maybe the U.S. can really shake it up this time and MAYBE Canadians (as usual) will follow suit! Politics in the Western World need a shake up! Governments work for the people! not the other way around...and we have a long long way to go before either of our countries can repair the damage our current politicians have caused..blah blah blah...yeah economy great...Judge a nation based on how it treats its needy people...and right now...we are ALL failing..
Andrew
0
said
0
jay
0
said
0
Now all the way to the White House.
Just wondering who will be the first man LOL
Bob
0
said
0
Roch
0
said
0
He remains a popular ex-President.
Matt
0
said
0
I'm glad he won.
I'm not sure who's the better choice between Obama and Clinton. One is new an inexperienced, the other is a real politician. I don't even think she knows where she'll stand on the issues come election time.
Joyce d'Entremont
0
said
0
sheri
0
said
0
J-F (Ottawa)
0
said
0
Perhaps our interest in your elections is proof that Canadians have views and knowledge on issues other then what is happening in our own towns.
edward
0
said
0
sam
0
said
0
Robert
0
said
0
The results from last night are making for an interesting race in both camps.
Wanda
0
said
0
Jason.
0
said
0
Now to come back on topic, hurray for Hillary, she may just do the same mistake her hubby did back in the days.
Boy am I glad I'm Canadian!!!
eastduchess
0
said
0
What is it about an intelligent, eloquent, gifted woman that scares the pants off the American male?
I was asked at a social funtion in the U.S. what I thought of Hillary. Upon expressing my admiration for her, I had a screaming, red-faced, insane-looking man scaring the living daylights out of me. If he didn't want my opinion, why would he ask in the first place?
For Hillary, "GO GIRL!"
Dan Ireland
0
said
0
After the time with Bush, it seems that you Americans are just so hard up for anyone to take over.
If Hillary wins... I wonder if S.Harper will start wearing a skirt???
Good luck!
Keith
0
said
0
An interest in American politics does not indicate a disinterest in our own. And the word is spelled "definitively" not "definitivly".
Lillian
0
said
0
Jeanne
0
said
0
Prowlax (Ottawa)
0
said
0
Gary
0
said
0
Shamaro
0
said
0
Laura Reid
0
said
0
Earl Robert
0
said
0