Clinton supporters are out in force in Hanover, New Hampshire.
HANOVER, New Hampshire (CNN) - She’s number one in our new CNN/WMUR New Hampshire Primary poll among Democrats, and it appears as of early afternoon, Hillary Clinton’s winning the sign wars leading up to tonight’s debate.
As we exited Interstate 89 and drove into Hanover, New Hampshire, site of tonight’s debate, signs and placards of the White House hopefuls started sprouting up along the road towards Dartmouth College.
By our unofficial count, the Democratic senator from New York had the most signs visible and the largest as well. A close second is New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson. He may be fourth in most national polls, but he’s second in our quick tally. A solid third in our count is Sen. Joe Biden. The Delaware Democrat had signs sprouting along the roadside during our entire ride into Hanover.
We didn’t see any Barack Obama signs until we reached the campus of Dartmouth College. It seemed odd, but then, as we turned the corner, we spotted Obama supporters and their signs. They were very vocal and very expressive.
To my surprise, I didn’t see any John Edwards signs. But the day is young, and the Democratic presidential debate is still hours away.
– CNN Deputy Political Director Paul Steinhauser
From CNN Politics
© 2011 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
| Advertising practices | Advertise with us | About us | Contact us | Work for us | Help
Hillary can pour all the money she wants into signs and paid staffers to put them up in the Dartmouth area, but she can never match the will of the volunteers working for Barack Obama. I've seen them up late working, driving miles, doing everything they can. They have no money but they do it anyway. That's the difference between the two campaigns and the reason why Hillary had the biggest and most signs. If you pay someone to put up a sign they will.
I'm sick and tired of politics as usual and that's why I'm supporting Barack Obama. The only one that can change things both in New Hampshire and in the country as a whole.
CNN, where is your report about Clintons killing the GQ story? Every major network is reporting it. How biased are you, really? Don't underestimate your viewers. Ever wondered what it does to your own ratings?
There's another debate?! This is over saturation of debates. Wasn't there only like six main debates on '04?
Wow, you people get riled up over signs. I wish you could come up with a valid reason to be so nasty about Sen. Clinton. Since you don't have one, you have to be petty. It's horribly sad.
I am pretty sure GQ has an Editor in Chief and an Editorial Board.... both have the say in what stories go to print. Why blame the Clintons? Again, how sad.
Why should CNN stoop down to the low intellect and biased reporting on Fox just to increase ratings?
Of course you can sell more widgets to dumb people than you can to smart people. CNN, keep your integrity.
CNN, where is your report about Clintons killing the GQ story?
I agree. Why hasn't this been on the main stream medias radar. Obama clears his throat then all the news agencies report something negative about him. It seems America needs to Wake up and see that the media dictates our votes.
Thank you Mr. Obama for not littering the streets with signs. By now I know the names of all the candidates running, I do not need signs to tell or remind me. These signs are nothing but condoned litter. In a little over a year they will be in landfills. Thank you Barack and Barack supporters for practicing what you preach in regards to saving the environment!
CNN doesn't want to tell anyone that the Clintons have been quashing news stories by waving the "no interview with Bill" stick. CNN also didn't make a big headline out of the fact that Hillary lost to Guliani in a head to head poll of swing voters 49% to 39% when Obama only lost by a 1% vote, well within the margin of error. I'm guessing Camp Hillary is also working to quash this news story http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/09/26/wclinton126.xml
Lobbyist money can buy a lot of signs.
So according to a prior comment, a non-descript poll of non-descript swing voters, shows Clinton losing to Guiliani in this group. Hey Karl Rove, is that you again playing games again?
Mike Smith,
It is no surprise that Clintons are using their power to control the media. However, respectable journalists and networks should not cave in under pressure from politicians and they should not allow to be used in manipulation of public opinion and election process. If corruption or fear of retaliation result in surpressing certain facts and information, that is the beginning of the end of free press. Is that what you want?
I have a question on 08 VP would hillary if she gets nomination pick John Edwards as VP?
Unfortunately, the signs say more about her candidacy than she will in the debate tonight.
Wow. What an absolutely useless article. Thank you CNN for wasting my time with your Sen. Clinton backing.
That decides it. Clinton has the most signs on Interstate 89. No point in actually having people vote – I think it's safe to say that she should be the Democratic candidate for the sheer fact that she has the most signs on Interstate 89 (although given that CNN is reporting this, I would guess that there is a 50% chance that this isn't even true).
The signs are tip of the iceberg. They show the enthusiasm and readiness of the Hillary campaign organization, which other candidates cannot.
These other candidates are rookies, as also exemplied in their election platforms. They are reactive rather than proactive.
Hillary has threatened to ruin everyone's career if she does not have more signs in New Hampshire than everyone else. It's worked for her on many people so far.
I know that Hillary is for illegal immigration, amnesty, I want to hear her say it on the dem debate out loud, I won't vote for any one who's for Amnesty and the war.