« Previous | Main | Next »

New Hampshire Turnout 'Absolutely Huge'

Share

January 08, 2008 12:37 PM

ABC News' Karen Travers Reports: New Hampshire Deputy Secretary of State Dave Scanlan told ABC News that turnout among primary voters today is "absolutely huge" -- and there are concerns about running out of ballots in towns like Portsmouth, Keene, Hudson and Pelham.

"Turnout is absolutely huge and towns are starting to get concerned that they may not have enough ballots," Scanlan said. "We are working on those issues. Everything else seems to be going smoothly."

Scanlan said that the Secretary of State's office is sending additional ballots to Portsmouth and Keene (traditionally Democratic strongholds), Hudson (Republican leaning with significant numbers of independents) and Pelham (large number of independents).

According to Scanlan, the ballot strain seems to be on Democratic ballots, which suggests that the undeclared voters are breaking for the Democratic primary. New Hampshire Secretary of State William Gardner predicted that 90,000 undeclared voters would vote in the Democratic primary compared to 60,000 voting in the Republican primary.

Deputy Secretary Scanlan said based on a formula anticipating higher turnout, they printed additional ballots, but in most cases towns will go "right down to the wire with ballots they need." The extra ballots will be insurance ballots in most places so election officials have a comfort level.

Scanlan said reports from polling places show that turnout has been steady and high though the morning but typically high activity periods will be lunch and after work.

For more New Hampshire primary politics, click on ABC News' The Note.

January 8, 2008 in Tancredo, Tom, Thompson, Fred | Permalink | User Comments (109)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

A high turnout, independents voting Democratic, more voters than ballots in some places? You have just described the conditions most favorable to a Barack Obama victory. If independents are voting for him, there are not enough to vote for McCain, and that will likely benefit Mitt Romney. As of 1PM, I would guess a combination of a big (10% or more?) Obama victory and a smaller (2% to 5% at the most) Romney victory is coming down the pike. We'll know in a few hours...

Posted by: Dave from NY | Jan 8, 2008 1:06:59 PM

Anyone notice a trend (ONLY on the GOP side of the aisle) how all but dead candidates are miraculously rising to the top of the heaps, state by primary state? I assure you, it is NOT a coincidence. It’s called persuasive writing/reporting and is something that journalists are taught in freshman college English 101. It is occuring with none other than our journalistic “friends” in the Democrat controlled, liberal media machine, doing all it can to choose THEIR GOP “favorite” for us. This is exactly how Mike Huckabee was elevated to frontrunner status from ZERO in a matter of a few weeks. There were nothing but puff pieces/articles/stories and absolutely NO scrutiny of his record mediocre, often liberal voting record as AR Governor. As a result, and much to the joy of the liberals, IA voters were convinced that Mr. Huckabee should be their choice...but as future Pastor of the United States.

Liberals are salivating at the prospect of anyone buy Romney winning the nomination. Now, the DNC liberal propaganda machine is attempting to do it again, but this time using, and I mean USING their old pal, John McCain in NH. Why? Because they know that Huckabee can’t win there.

Mitt Romney is by far the most qualified man in EITHER party and is a class act all the way. And yet since he became a GOP candidate for president, I have seen nothing but negative, trivial articles/stories about his Mormon religion, his money, his slick appearance, etc. fully intended to sway an naive electorate that pays way too little attention to the most important 4 year event in our country.

Mitt Romney is a TRUE family man and very successful at turning failed or failing enterprises around and Lord knows the United States of America needs turning around. It should be run as a business first, with a strong military to protect it from harm. All other social, giveaway programs should be scrutinized (and certainly would be under a Romney presidency) as to efficiency and even necessity. The fact that he was even elected Governor in a state (MA) controlled by 85% Democrat legislature was a feat in itself. He did a very admirable job as Governor as well. Of course, his many justified vetoes were constantly overturned by those liberal Democrats which made for a lot of frustration. Mr. Romney is far and away the best candidate to take over the presidency. And, I can assure you that it will be MUCH to the chagrin of the Democrat National Committee liberal propaganda machine.

Posted by: Tom S. | Jan 8, 2008 1:13:55 PM

Please give me a break it's 7 electoral
votes. I am a middle Age women of color
and I will be voting for Clinton, those

one time voters in the other state have
nothing to do with a 20 year vet, who looks at the issue, new story please!!!!!

Andrea
Baltimore

Posted by: Andrea Lorick | Jan 8, 2008 1:21:06 PM

Mitt Romney may well be the most competent candidate, but he is also seen by many as the least trustworthy and courageous, a flipflopper par excellance, and a crass snooty humorless chameleon to boot.

Posted by: northlite | Jan 8, 2008 1:22:48 PM

The only thing Romney flip flopped on (and the press has taken it to the max) is on Abortion. Other than, that there is very little change in his message. The key is RECORD people RECORD RECORD RECORD. Obama has a marginal record (but all the liberal endorsements), and Clinton has a marginal record (but promises to be the most liberal), and the true liberal by RECORD is Huckabee. No one wants to compare line for line records. I think McCain should stick to his 2000 NH promise "that would be his last run". Huckabee claims the court made him do it (half billion net tax gain).

Posted by: Randy | Jan 8, 2008 1:30:04 PM

Romney is a first class individual in every respect. Huckabee is unethical and it is well documented.

Posted by: Chris George | Jan 8, 2008 1:31:55 PM

And you, northlite, have just made Tom S.'s point in the first paragraph of his post. You don't know Mitt Romney. You only know what the press tells you. And you've just regurgitated the press's talking points on Romney for the last few months.

Posted by: Greg T. | Jan 8, 2008 1:33:26 PM

i hope Obama does win by more than 10% b/c it will make Hillary's comeback on Feb 5, and subsequent surge to the nomination, even sweeter! Comeback Kid Part 2!!!

Posted by: boynla, LA, CA | Jan 8, 2008 1:34:09 PM

tom s.,you are way out there dude. that guy (romney)is so far right he might even be in the bleachers. of course, someone like him always has to run to give the real republican whack jobs someone to pull for. i guess its a good thing he has you (and rush) in his corner,eh tom?

as for obama, i actually feel sorry for the people who support/vote for him ,its obvious they are a tad short on working grey matter up there ,or perhaps they just arent using what they have but ,for whatever reason, they are largely devoid of competent reasoning and sound judgement in their decision making and generally rely on hyperbole, rhetoric and emotions ,(with a big dose of oprah ,jerry, or dr phil thrown in) to make up their minds for them.

detestable even as they are , its not disgust at their ignorance that bothers me as much as i pity them for being so simplistic ,naive ,unobjective and uninformed.

its been said "stupid is as stupid does...and " no sense being stupid if you cant show it" ...

GO OBAMA WE WANT CHANGE!! (snicker...)

Posted by: bah | Jan 8, 2008 1:34:20 PM

Nobama, a Romney supporter, writes:

"Liberals are salivating at the prospect of anyone buy Romney winning the nomination." [sic]

Don't you think it's a little Freudian to have the words "Romney" and "buy" right next to each other?

Huckabee 2008!

Posted by: Ben | Jan 8, 2008 1:34:51 PM

Obama and McCain have become the media candidates. McCain, after his astonishing third place finish in Iowa become the anointed one. Obama has actually been elevated by the press to cultural icon status.

In 2000 it was Bush that the Press told us was the most hugable and lovable candidate. In 2008, its Obama. I find that interesting, but don't see it as evidence of a compliant lap dog press. It is more like they are just trying to improve their profits by supporting the winner of the horse race.

Posted by: Frank | Jan 8, 2008 1:38:57 PM

one time voters are what is going to win the fall elections. Andrea, Hillary is a wonderful lady, but she has run the least exciting campaign she could. I think she missed her chance 4 years ago. She chickened out and now she is Dick Gephardt.

Posted by: Spot On | Jan 8, 2008 1:41:11 PM

Dave from NY

You got the Obama guess correct, but the McCain guess wrong. It isn't how many percentage of independents vote in the Republican primary. It is what is the percentage of the Republican primary are independent. In other words, if the independent voters turnout is significant compared to the Republican registrated voters, then McCain wins. I think McCain will win because of the increase independent turnout.

Posted by: Richard | Jan 8, 2008 1:41:18 PM

McCain, by a nose. Romney is a sinking ship.

Posted by: Spot On | Jan 8, 2008 1:50:56 PM

Anyone stopped to think that maybe independents are flocking to Obama because they see the chance to end the Clinton campaign? That most in this nation are tired of the Clintons, and see this as the chance to make them go away forever?

Posted by: JB | Jan 8, 2008 1:53:04 PM

The Republican's strongest candidates would be Romney & Giuliani, both of whom have been carved up by the press. John McCain will NEVER be President. The Straight Talk Express from 2000 is now the The Last Gasp Express. If he does not plummet like a rock after NH, he will lose to any Democrat in a Landslide.

Posted by: Christopher London | Jan 8, 2008 1:58:50 PM

"Liberals are salivating at the prospect of anyone buy Romney winning the nomination."

HA! I am a liberal, tried and true, and INVIITE the citizens of New Hampshire -- and every other state and territory -- to send Mitt Romney our way. I even EVITE you guys to nominate Mitt.

Are you kidding? Just what Americans are looking for: a soulless C.E.O. with as much "authenticity" as a Guns N Roses cover. More staged than the High School Musical. Why don't you just nomin8 Avril Lavigne?

The "liberal" media just covers horse races. They dont give a rat's paycheck about Huckabee's "positions." Or anyone's "positions." The media wants to tell exciting stories about insurgents and ninth inning upsets, rookies and pros, its sports writing on another level.

Don't be a sore loser... You guys won election after election on the backs of religious voters (who you kept in the closet by never passing any meaningful abortion or gay marriage proposals)... then they go behind your back and nomin8 Huckelberry. HA!

Posted by: DREW | Jan 8, 2008 2:01:12 PM

Sorry, that should have been directed at Tom S.

Posted by: DS | Jan 8, 2008 2:05:40 PM

Tom S., I am a democrat, I hope that romney wins. Not because I agree with a single thing he's ever done in his personal or professional life, but because there is no way he would win nation-wide. Huckabee is the only Republican I'm afraid of winning at the moment.

Posted by: Alex Encandar | Jan 8, 2008 2:08:17 PM

Governor Romney signed legislation to allow an unborn child to be killed for a $50 co-pay. How many children do you think are worth just $50?

Posted by: Tom | Jan 8, 2008 2:08:59 PM

Post a comment