New Hampshire told the political establishment they need to change or die.
American voters are grumpy, even angry with the politics that has been served up to them in recent years. Trump and Sanders prospered over the rest, who are seen as representing politics as they know it. Here are the results:
Many are hoping that Trump’s victory marks a high water mark. Around 65% of Republicans want someone else. But only Christie and Fiorina have dropped out, leaving Kasich, Cruz, Bush and Rubio to fight for second place. Unless their vote is consolidated onto one person there’s a good chance Trump will win.
Sanders thumped Clinton, putting real fear into the Clinton camp. He won every demographic, except the old and the rich. The under 30s went for Sanders 83%. Women preferred Sanders 55 to 44.
NPR identified 5 Things That Explain The Results. Clearly Hillary Clinton has a problem with women. Intrerventions by Gloria Steinem and Madeleine Albright were unhelpful:
- Campaigning with Clinton on Saturday, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright thundered, “There’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other!” — a phrase she has used before, but one that was specifically targeted at younger female voters who were wooed by Sanders. Feminist leader Gloria Steinem also stirred controversy when she suggested last week that younger women were supporting Sanders just so they could meet boys.
Tim Dunlop feels that the choice between pragmatism and principle could have lessons for Australian politics.
Daryl McCann sees New Hampshire as a triumph of emotion over reason.
- Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump might be the most vibrant performers in this political theatre, but they are also the most dangerous.
John Barron points out that candidates that don’t win in New Hampshire have often gone on to win the race.
Anthony J. Gaughan provides an intelligent commentary at The Conversation, and looks forward to the next contest, for the Republicans it’s South Carolina and the Democrats Nevada. Trump has a clear lead in the polls. Nevada in less predictable. He sees polarisation as a leading feature of the campaign as the US becomes more fractured and divided.
There is a mood amongst active Democrats that they want to take back their party from the pragmatic centrists. But would the majority of Americans vote for a socialist?
The Washington Post publishes a Gallup Poll that says “no”. Eleven characteristics were listed. 93% would vote for a Catholic, 60% for a Muslim, 58% for an atheist, but only 47% for a socialist, whereas 50% say they would not.
But then would 50% vote for Donald Trump? I think not.
Hi Brian, you will note the author of that article where the Gallup poll was discussed says it was conducted before the Sanders campaign really got going so the favour ability towards a Socialist candidate may have increased since then.
Also worth noting that the categories reflect different types of things (apples and oranges problem). Categories such as a black candidate or a female candidate are essentially about prejudice, which most people don’t like to admit to even if they feel it, whereas categories such as socialist are about ideology. Therefore the results are not directly comparable.
Sorry – ‘favourability’ – should have used the preview function!
Valid points, Val. The Sanders campaign has surprised everyone. Also Trump has already gotten further than expected.
Clinton could take some comfort from the fact that in 2008 Obama lost in New Hampshire, but went on to win. But then she won in 2008 and it’s clear people feel differently about her now, and not necessarily in a good way.
Val
I couldn’t agree more, spot on.
Brian
The US system is from outer space to me.
Apparently;
Val: Some of the candidates appear to come from a dark space.
Equally critical is what happens in the senate and congress. There has been a radical change during the Obama presidency. The parties changed from being a loose collection of independents who didn’t vote as a team into something more like the disciplined Australian system. Add the growing influence of the Tea Party in the Republican party and the system ground to a halt.