Gardner, unlike pollsters, right on the money

This is an instance where the pundits did more than the candidate herself to motivate female participation. News anchors (male), especially msnbc and fox practically ensured a clinton win. I could only cringe as I listened to that hardball guy practically gloat openly as he predicted a flaming and very public thrashing of Hillary Clinton. CNN's Roland Martin got it right when he stated that the news reporting on Hillary's "emotional moment" was very wrong and that it was a motivating factor. The weather also played a role in that women were able to get out in greater numbers than would be the case if inclement conditions prevailed. I hope chris mathews and company take a good and honest look at themselves and realize they should be neutral in news reporting.

Is there any thought that Obama's poor performance in NH is the same phenomenon as happened with Tom Bradley when he ran for gov of Calif in the 80's?The polls showed him ahead in some cases but voters wouldn't pull the trigger for the black guy once in the voting booth.

The pundits today are talking about the Hillary "comeback". Which sandhole have they been sticking their heads. For the last six months or so Hillary has been a lock cinch to win the New Hampshire primary. At one point, she was acknowledged to have an advantage of more than 55 points on her nearest rival.. Now, with a victory of less than 5 points Hillary is considered a "comeback" winner. Who spins this crap?? The headline should have been "Hillary escapes New Hampshire". The content should have focused on the major lead disipating after the debates began, and that the majority of the uncommitted and "newly registered" voters prefer other than Hillary. If Bill stands in front of the crowd and barks how the media are unfair I think I'll just puke.

The pundits today are talking about the Hillary "comeback". Which sandhole have they been sticking their heads. For the last six months or so Hillary has been a lock cinch to win the New Hampshire primary. At one point, she was acknowledged to have an advantage of more than 55 points on her nearest rival.. Now, with a victory of less than 5 points Hillary is considered a "comeback" winner. Who spins this crap?? The headline should have been "Hillary escapes New Hampshire". The content should have focused on the major lead disipating after the debates began, and that the majority of the uncommitted and "newly registered" voters prefer other than Hillary. If Bill stands in front of the crowd and barks how the media are unfair I think I'll just puke.

This is an instance where the pundits did more than the candidate herself to motivate female participation. News anchors (male), especially msnbc and fox practically ensured a clinton win. I could only cringe as I listened to that hardball guy practically gloat openly as he predicted a flaming and very public thrashing of Hillary Clinton. CNN's Roland Martin got it right when he stated that the news reporting on Hillary's "emotional moment" was very wrong and that it was a motivating factor. The weather also played a role in that women were able to get out in greater numbers than would be the case if inclement conditions prevailed. I hope chris mathews and company take a good and honest look at themselves and realize they should be neutral in news reporting.

The pundits today are talking about the Hillary "comeback". Which sandhole have they been sticking their heads. For the last six months or so Hillary has been a lock cinch to win the New Hampshire primary. At one point, she was acknowledged to have an advantage of more than 55 points on her nearest rival.. Now, with a victory of less than 5 points Hillary is considered a "comeback" winner. Who spins this crap?? The headline should have been "Hillary escapes New Hampshire". The content should have focused on the major lead disipating after the debates began, and that the majority of the uncommitted and "newly registered" voters prefer other than Hillary. If Bill stands in front of the crowd and barks how the media are unfair I think I'll just puke.

And the number of voters would have been even higher had the ballot included a no column and the highest net yes wins. Many, possibly a result changing many, are more anti- than pro- but have no way to show that on a yes only ballot, or poll. Many of those choose to not vote at all rather than be forced to vote for their lesser of evils to vote against their greater of such. All the polls show a large dissatisfaction with those running. Even the front runners have a barely 35%, if that, approval number. Why do we have to say we want parsnips to say we don't want broccoli? Why?

If the glass ceiling for women in government is to be broken it should happen with a female candidate like Hillary Clinton who has demonstrated ability, intelligence,commitment,compassion and strength in the public arena.

Hillary is too divisive. Luckily NH does not represent the way that the rest of America feels about the candidates. In NH it was not the female vote that made the difference, it was the independents who voted for McCain, which should have gone toward Obama.

The media should change their perspective from making this a case of women vs. men. It is a case of Baby Boomer Liberal Moms vs. their more educated and informed children and everyone else who wants progress in this country.

People vote not pollsters or dumb bloggers.
The people of New hampshire made up their own minds and took the trouble and time to vote.

Most boggers are too stupid to elect a qualified person.

People vote not pollsters or dumb bloggers.
The people of New hampshire took the trouble and time to vote.
Most boggers are too stupid to elect a qualified person.

I agree that all the talk about a "comeback" by Hillary is crap. She lost Iowa by a landslide. And almost lost NH too. As of right now, Obama has more delegates than she does.

So where's the "comeback"? The ONLY way to spin it is, up to this point, she's getting beaten. She needs a new staff mix, a new direction, and a new message if she's going to win. And for God's sake, she needs to stop ACTING like a frontrunner; so plastic / wooden; and start campaigning like she's got a soul.

But having said all that, the very fact we have NO real front runner on either side, Republican or Democrat, suggests just how much the choices we HAVE been given stink; on both sides.

Because strong candidates, strongly supported, by passionate supporters, wouldn't have to worry so much about being slam dunked out of nowhere land like Clinton and Romney have.

So, they both stink. NEXT!!!!

Hillary is the "Change" that our country needs!!! A woman's point of view and decision making - You can't get any different!!!!!

The news channels have picked who they are backing - then spin, spin, spin away.............on the candidates they don't back.

Back who you like - but stop using your opinion to spin what others do and say to fit into narrow ways of thinking!!!

The only thing of interest in this election is the amazing difference in vote counts from precints using Diebold counting machines vs those that did not. Honest elections in this country are a joke. One look at the numbers tells the story. At least three candidates have filed for a statewide recount. It will be interesting to see if the same pre-programable machines will be used to do it.

Well for starters, hillary is more qualified for the job, she has been there and done that, she has championed her own heath care plan, which got swiped and put in to play w/out any mention of her, she has always stood and faught for the people with less, she was first lady, that gave her some middleast knowledge since she did travel there to meet there leaders, so yes i could go on but i have mad my point. NOW do can america with-stand another president, on training wheel's??? I say hillary first then obama afterwards he get's some v.p. experience. and surley in 16yrs. we the people can put our country back together agin.