January 10, 2008
Firstly, I’d like to thank Jason for bringing this issue to my attention.
This is the U.S.A right? The country that invades countries and funds foreign governments in the name of ‘promoting democracy’ right? (Or not). Maybe America’s taking tips from Kenya.
Let’s skip to the point. In the New Hampshire primary, some votes were counted by hand and some were counted with the aid of a machine. You’d expect the percentage of votes won by each candidate to be roughly the same in the hand-counted votes and the machine-counted votes right? Wrong.
In the hand-counted votes, (which are harder to rig) Clinton won 34.7% whereas Obama won 38.8% – he won. However, in the machine-counted votes Clinton won 40.1% and Obama won 35.8%. Suspicious no? The machine-counted votes gave Hillary 5% more and Obama 3% less. I find it hard to believe that there should be such significant differences with both candidates – especially if both difference benefit the candidate favoured by the establishment. Here is a page with a whole bunch of figured detailing the differences between machine and hand counted cotes.
Of-course, just like Kenya, it’s not like anything will happen. After all, it’s America – land of freedom and democracy. How could the elections have been rigged?
January 10, 2008
Just a heads-up here, John Kerry will soon (or has recently) announce his endorsement of Barack Obama for Democratic presidential candidate. His main reason is that Obama is the candidate with the best chance of uniting America. Interestingly, he also said that Obama’s ‘inexperience’ is an advantage: “Because of his newness on the scene, he has not created the political opposition and enemies that come with extensive service in politics. He is a clean slate.”, in his own words.
Read the whole article here.
January 9, 2008
It’s old news by now, but Clinton has won the popular vote in New Hampshire. Jason is right – it’s time New Hampshire changed their motto. The former president’s wife beat Obama by 2% of the vote to win the early state. On the Republican side, McCain beat Romney by a comfortable 6%; as Errington Thompson says, Romney is the real loser here.. Getting back to the primaries, are the two victories unconnected? I think not. Obama and McCain both benefit from the support of a majority of independent voters. That the media portrayed Obama as the clear favourite before the election must have resulted in these independents deciding that he didn’t need their support, and instead shifting their votes to McCain. The good news here is that Obama hasn’t lost the support of these voters that carried him in Iowa, they simply thought he could win without their support. Optimism with a dash of hope leads me to believe that these voters will return to back Obama in the coming primaries, (e.g. South Carolina). The bad news here is that independents cannot vote in the Democratic primaries in many states to come.
Hillary’s made a lot of ruckus about the parallels between her victory in New Hampshire and that of her husband, which resulted in him winning the nomination. However, the opposition that she faces is very different from what her husband faced – voters have a clear figure to rally around this year in Obama, (Edwards’s definite defeat in this primary might result in some of his supporters shifting their support to Obama simply to keep Hillary out). Clinton the First did not face such a unified opposition.
Finally, and perhaps very importantly, both Hillary and Obama walk away from this election with 9 delegates, meaning that Obama is still ahead in elected delegates. See this post for videos of the post-primary speeches of both candidates. And if you want more on the New Hampshire primary, see this informative analysis.
PS: 39% of college graduates voted for Obama, 5% more than those who voted for Hillary.
January 4, 2008
As most of you have probably heard by now, Obama won the Iowan Democratic Caucuses with 37.58% of the votes. This I expected, but the next bit of news surprised be: Edwards came second with 29.75%, inching out Clinton, who had 29.47%. That’s right, Clinton came last – party time! (This post has results for every candidate).
However, although this might make for good media fodder, Obama wont actually get too many more national delegates from Iowa. Due to the way in which they’re allocated, Obama will only claim 16 potential delegates from Iowa – and Hillary will claim 15, one more than Edward’s 14. Boo. (No other Democratic candidate got enough votes to claim national delegates). That’s right, an almost 8% winning margin in votes will translate to only one additional delegate for Obama compared to Clinton. Obama’s victory is something to celebrate, but the primaries are far from won, and it will take more hard work to keep Hillary out.
The record turnout is probably what clinched the victory for Obama – 220,588 voters participated this year, compared to 2004’s 124,000. A large percentage of the voters were people under 30 and independent voters, two groups that mainly supported Obama. And women, the support of which Clinton was banking on, split the vote between Clinton and Obama. Maybe they know that a woman running for president isn’t as big a deal as the media make it out to be.
Oh, and finally, here’s a story that is being swamped by the Iowa Caucus results – Democrats in Minnesota have captured a vacated Republican seat. A good day for the Democrats.
Onwards to New Hampshire!
January 4, 2008
So it might be a bit late for this, (considering that the Iowa caucus is already well underway in the US) but these are the candidates I’d vote for if I was an American citizen.
John Edwards Barack Obama
It’s a close one here – between Edwards and Obama that is, (sorry Hillary, you didn’t even come close to entering the picture). In the end, I’d have to go with Obama, simply because he has a greater chance of beating Hillary than Edwards does at the moment. Honestly I wouldn’t mind either of them being chosen. I like the Iowa system in this respect, because of the importance of a voter’s second choice of candidate.
Republicans: Ron Paul
No brainer here guys. Speaks honestly for smaller government, non-interventionism (not isolationism), and has the voting record to back up his words. Media is scared of him, (*cough* Fox News *cough*), but if he won it would be amazing.
So that’s it, just the quick obligatory US Elections post. For more on the Iowa caucus, this blog post predicts a Obama and Romney victory, and discusses the reasons for such a prediction.