After the Elections

I was driving home when a friend called me to say that Clinton was leading by 4 points. I could not believe my ears. 4 points??? I thought polls had said Obama was leading by 10 points or so, and as I had told the friend earlier in the day, polls are rarely wrong. What was happening?

I got home and switched on the TV, and sure enough Clinton was leading, at times by 5 times, before settling down on a final win by 2 points or so. Pollsters and analysts will be analyzing this for days to come, whether her becoming emotional helped her or not. It appears as though it did – that combined with a perception during the debate that the other candidates were all attacking here seemed to bring out women in large numbers. The final tally for Obama and Edwards did not wary much from the poll predictions, but Clinton’s had, prompting people to think that women turned in large numbers at the last minute. Her campaigning style in the last few days also probably helped get voters who were deciding at that stage, as she was down into lots of detail at that point, whereas Obama was giving high level speeches, with the goal of not doing anything wrong. I myself had liked her speech and answers to questions at the Nashua High School. At work I saw Clinton became a candidate again with colleagues who had been thinking of Obama or Edwards. A lot of people were indeed changing their mind till the very last minute.

Earlier in the day I had spent some time at the Edwards campaign office with last minute calling as part of get out of the vote operations. Most people had already voted (though there was one who had said she had not, but intended to, and was still undecided with one hour for the polls to close). Some folks who revealed who they had voted for said they had voted for Clinton, and this was different from my sense while canvassing over the weekend – then folks had said they had decided on Obama (of course all this is just an observation from one person, not a scientific study). The mood in the Edwards campaign office was somber, with noone talking about the results but still working hard. The volunteers seemed to take it more in their stride, used to it as they probably were of candidates they believed in not winning for a variety of reasons. Some answers brought weary chuckles from the volunteers – someone who could not decide between Obama and Edwards had voted for Richardson, someone who had been leaning towards Edwards had voted for McCain. Election decision thought processes can be funny indeed!

In the end it was very disappointing for me that a candidate who had worked so hard and had started so early, a campaign so focused on issues and a grassroots operation, could do so poorly. Edwards had been in the state from early summer, holding countless town hall meetings. Every question was answered, and if there was no time at the meeting one could email the campaign and get an answer. The campaign had 80 paid staff in the state and a large network of volunteers, and had been working from very early on to build up the grassroots network. They had organized house parties on issues, had visited the Nashua Peace Group and various other neighborhood groups, had been slowly and steadily working towards their goal. I had seen first hand how the folks at the Nashua campaign office had worked their hearts out, out of a deep sense of belief in their candidate and what he stood for. The Edwards campaign had been the first to come out with a detailed policy document on complex issues like healthcare, and had very early on published a detailed 100 page policy booklet outlining all of Edwards’ positions and planned policies (one in particular I had liked was the college for everyone plan). Volunteers had knocked on doors, called countless people on phones, had had extensive policy discussions with voters. But in the end Edwards lost, lost to the media hype, to popularity based on what I considered more superficial characteristics, and to the frenzy that accompanied the process after Iowa. So much for grassroots democracy I cannot help think. So much for deciding based on policy that the early states’ voters are famous for. In the end the feeling in the gut seems to matter substantially (if not the most) – the likeability factor, the desire to vote for a woman or an black president, the desire to be part of history, the desire to vote for a winning candidate.

Driving to work the next morning past sagging signs in melting snow under a gray winter sky, I had the sense that New Hampshire was happy to get back to normal life after the elections. It had enjoyed its moment in the spotlight, as it always does, and is now ready to quietly retreat to its every day life, to the rest of its long winter with plenty of snow, to its range of activities ranging from skiing to the free state project to the peace groups. It is content to be left alone, till the next presidential election cycle brings it into the spotlight again. Volunteers carrying their candidate’s signs were leaving town in the bus I took to Boston that day, and the Edwards campaign office would be closed by now – they had planned to clear out by 2.00pm.

I asked the cab driver who took me to the bus station whether he had voted, and he said he had been working all day. I asked the youth who sold me the bus ticket and he said he really wanted to but had been working all day. How many of the working class had voted? Even the most widespread of grassroots operations that mark the primaries had not involved these people. Democracy still does not involve every single person, and democracy depends on a lot on one’s gut feeling.

I am disappointed. But hey, tomorrow is another day.