January 9th, 2008
12:04 AM ET
9 years ago

Final: The New Hampshire delegate breakdown

In the New Hampshire Democratic primary

CNN estimates:

* Hillary Clinton has won 9 New Hampshire delegates (3 statewide, 6 district-level)

* Barack Obama has won 9 New Hampshire delegates (3 statewide, 6 district-level)

* John Edwards has won 4 New Hampshire delegates (2 statewide, 2 district-level)

* 22 Democratic delegates were at stake in the New Hampshire primary

* There are also 8 Democratic “superdelegates” in New Hampshire. Of those, 2 support Clinton and 3 support Obama, according to a CNN survey.

***

In the New Hampshire Republican primary

CNN estimates:

* John McCain has won 7 New Hampshire delegates

* Mitt Romney has won 4 New Hampshire delegates

* Mike Huckabee has won 1 New Hampshire delegate

* 12 GOP delegates were at stake in the New Hampshire primary

* All GOP delegates at stake in the New Hampshire primary are statewide


Filed under: New Hampshire
soundoff (108 Responses)
  1. CLINTON 2008

    Mrs. Ladybird Johnson Former First Lady, United States Of America. Women can move beyond the struggle for equal status and for material goods to the challenges and opportunities of citizenship. I always hope that the very best of our people will go into politics and some of our best are women. So, I say: "Don't hold back. Don't be shy. Step forward in every way you can to plan boldly, to speak clearly, to offer the leadership which the world needs. to pluck out prejudice from our lives, to remove fear and hate where it exists, and to create a world unafraid to work out its destiny in peace. Eleanor Roosevelt has already made her own splendid and incomparable contribution to that foundation. Let us go and do likewise, within the measure of our faith and the limits of our ability. Let Eleanor Roosevelt teach Us all to turn the arts of compassion into the victories of democracy. Eleanor Roosevelt taught us that sometimes silence is the greatest sin. VOTE CLINTON 2008

    January 9, 2008 08:41 am at 8:41 am |
  2. J. Seravo

    Hillary should fire Penn and hire Carville. She also needs to discuss the issues as she sees them and how Obama is not talking about them. So far, Obama talks a good talk, but his rhetoric is shallow. Hillary has the experience–it was obvious during the NH debate. She needs to challenge her opponent to state his platform.

    January 9, 2008 08:51 am at 8:51 am |
  3. Christian, Tampa FL

    So for all intents and purposes, Obama actually won by one superdelegate.

    There was a double victory for the Obama campaign in New Hampshire: first that he could win an equal number of delegates as Hillary, and second that the media will hopefully butt out and let the candidates and voters interact.

    January 9, 2008 08:52 am at 8:52 am |
  4. william

    As a british person, I am at a loss. How the results from New Hampshire can declare a winner in the contest? I thought a draw would a proper result or a win for Obama, due to the 2 to 1 win, or am I missing something here?
    The tears swung the minds of the delegates? (Bo ho) funny way to choose a leader, shed crocodile tears and you win. Just a thought.

    January 9, 2008 08:54 am at 8:54 am |
  5. J. DiPasquale

    I' m sick and tired hearing of your shameless promoting, self proclaimed Best Political Team. It seems to me they too were wrong in the New Hampshire primaries. They're nothing more than Monday morning quarterbacks. You could hear the same commentary on other networks who don't have "the best political team". One question – how come no one from "the best political team" said one word about delegates to the respective conventions won by each candidate. Did they forget that's how the nomination process works?

    January 9, 2008 09:06 am at 9:06 am |
  6. whiterosebuddy

    O you bet Hillary's crowd are sore losers. That crowd was probably not even from NH. This primary does not pass the smell test. Hillary is too cocksure about being the nominee she told Couric she WOULD be the nominee as did McAulifee. Both say this with such certainty even before the IA caucuses that it is hard to beleive this is not rigged. Hillary had a very small crowd for there to have been a massive turnout and for her to have won with 2% more of the vote. They called for more Democratic ballots early yet they say the independent vote was split evenly between McCain and Barack. If this is true we know those Democratics were not coming out in droves fo vote for Hillary. She is too dislike. But with the corrupt machine politics they could eek out a win for her just like they did for Bill. Note how both came within 2% only Bill lost. Even so, they get the same number of delegates thus the comeback kid moniker for Bill. The real story is going untold and that is how Barack has galvanized a movement in this country. Now if only we the people are allowed to elect the people's candidate instead of the dirty political rigging of votes that we have witnessed last night in NH. Obama is by far the best candidate.

    January 9, 2008 09:13 am at 9:13 am |
  7. Susan

    Now, I get it - Just like with the Electoral College, it's not about raw numbers; it's about delegates where it counts:
    Obama – 3 statewide delegates, 6 district delegates, 3 superdelagates = 12
    Clinton – 3 statewide delegates, 6 district delegates, 2 superdelagates = 11
    Edwards – 2 statewide delegates, 2 district delegates
    Obama wins! Edwards will give his delegates to Obama, for a total of 16 delagates to Clinton's 11. Repeat that through the primary season, and Obama can wrap this up before the convention.

    Do you think Hillary would consider being Vice President?

    January 9, 2008 09:18 am at 9:18 am |
  8. Ginny Ca

    Don't forget the TOTAL delegate count now stands 180 for Hillary (including superdelegates) and 78 for Obama (including superdelegates). Go Hillary! Keep rackin' 'em up!

    January 9, 2008 09:19 am at 9:19 am |
  9. Andrew

    Constant winning: be it second or first all the time will eventually put u first. Go Romney

    January 9, 2008 09:26 am at 9:26 am |
  10. Seam, Philly PA

    Vote ABC – Anyone but Clinton.

    January 9, 2008 09:40 am at 9:40 am |
  11. Bill W - PA

    So I'm not getting this delegate thing – you can "win" a delegate, but they don't have to vote for you? And there are "Super Delegates" who can vote for whoever they want? It all sounds crooked to me.

    January 9, 2008 09:41 am at 9:41 am |
  12. Sheila McCoughlin

    EXCUSE ME....DOES ANYONE REALIZE THERE ARE 2 PARTIES RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT? A N D MORE THAN 3 CANIDATES? HELLLLLLOO THERE ARE SOME REPUBLICANS OUT HERE THAT WOULD LIKE SOME NEWS ON OUR CANIDATES!!!!!

    January 9, 2008 09:52 am at 9:52 am |
  13. Tom, New York, NY

    WOW... amazing the ignorance (and shall we say lack of experience) that shows from Obama supporters....obvious from their comments that they do NOT know the process of the delegates going to the National Convention to choose the party's candidate....the tally that CNN has is obviously incomplete IF you want to include superdelegates... which you really cannot do now because those votes can (and most likely will in some cases) change between now and the convention. Plus, CNN is only including superdelegates that have "pledged" their support publicly at this point... so the total delegate count in NH is NOT finished yet....just like Iowa's is not finished yet either.... yes, the portion of delegates decided by the public vote/causcus total have been determined and that is the only for sure number...and Obama is leading by one at this point ....

    Keep tuned.....no matter what anyone says this is not going to be decided anytime soon....

    And maybe some of you guys should educate yourself on the process instead of spending your time showing your ignorance here in the ticker blog...

    January 9, 2008 10:12 am at 10:12 am |
  14. S.B. Stein E.B. NJ

    I wish there was something to make it clear how the delegate system works in both parties. This is confusing to people. Is there some way or place that does the explaining?

    January 9, 2008 10:13 am at 10:13 am |
  15. Ian Webster

    I love how all of you love "great oratory" from senator Obama and Hillary. Last time I checked, it was actions that got the job done, not saying a bunch of "inspiring" crap to make you vote for the person. Ron Paul has stayed consistent throughout his years in Congress, and is virtually untouchable as far as doing what he says. Picture a toilet flushing, and that is what is happening to our once great nation...

    January 9, 2008 10:20 am at 10:20 am |
  16. Bukky, Balt MD

    ha! so she "won" but he dint have to win to win HA HA HA

    January 9, 2008 10:22 am at 10:22 am |
  17. M Ruffins

    I really liked the Clinton ERA and its impact on the Middle Class but their willingness to hit below the belt with the "WIN AT ALL COST" tactics make me question their integrity. In addition I feel that many of their policy flaws didn't show up until after Clinton left office (nafta, cafta etc.) And I really have to reflect back to their lack of support during the "04" Campaign. It shines light on the fact that they really wanted GEORGE BUSH to win so that she(Hillary) could win with little opposition atleast so they thought. That is a campaign built for individual success namely (THEIRS) and NOT the PEOPLE"S SUCCESS

    January 9, 2008 10:23 am at 10:23 am |
  18. tony

    any prediction for Michigan?

    January 9, 2008 10:23 am at 10:23 am |
  19. John S.

    PLEASE.................
    Don't you think that after 20 years we need someone other than a Bush or a Clinton to lead us. So, too, McCain is a real patriot but he's been around forever. If it's Hillary, where's the change? As a republican yearning for change, I'd vote for Obama over McCain. I'd vote for McCain over Hillary. I'd vote for Romney over all of them.

    January 9, 2008 10:30 am at 10:30 am |
  20. Charles DiVenti

    This is a victory for Clinton's democratic machine. I'm still wondering what she accomplished in the Senate. For that matter, what experience did she have to win the Senate seat in New York State? A failed health care plan. Maybe if you consider table placements and seating world leaders at dinners in the White House she has significant experience over Barrack. Hillary is an anomaly of the Press. Her expereince is imaginary.

    Barrack is the candidate of true conviction and has an uncorrupted vision for America. As for the expereince, when he started as a US Senator he had eight years experience on the the state level which far exceeds Hillary's.

    Barrack means what he says while Hillary tells a Americans what they want to hear.
    American don't get fooled by the Hillary spin machine! Look at her Senate record. What legislation has she put forth and passed?It's time to stand up and really be counted. Vote Barack Obama 08 and get a say in the future of America.

    January 9, 2008 10:41 am at 10:41 am |
  21. Braineel

    A piece of advice for John Edwards, expand your list of examples for your speeches when it comes to the health care issue. I am very much behind your use of powerful concrete examples but as someone following the race to the Whitehouse closely hearing exactly the same message over and over is not as exciting as your competitors. I understand the importance of staying on message but I think that can be done more effectively than you are now doing it. I hope you will continue to enliven the debate with your very valid points.

    January 9, 2008 11:07 am at 11:07 am |
  22. Randolph Monroe, Chicago

    So Hill has 9 Delegates and Obama has 9 Delegates and Hill has 2 superdelegates and Obama has 3 superdelegates.

    So

    9 + 2 = 11

    And

    9 + 3 = 12

    and

    11 < 12

    but Hillary won?!?

    January 9, 2008 11:09 am at 11:09 am |
  23. Tyler in Raleigh, NC

    So what you are saying is.... Obama one MORE delagates than Clinton.

    The "win" will get her momentum, as Iowa got Obama some. But really, this election is pretty much dead even. The interesting part will be what Edwards and Richardson do after they lose in their home states....

    January 9, 2008 11:43 am at 11:43 am |
  24. Bill W - PA

    4 years ago, we had a scandal with voting machines. DIEBOLD manfactured the machines. The CEO of DIEBOLD was a huge Bush supporter, and stated publicly that he "guaranteed" George Bush the election. And by a "miracle", George Bush won the presidency on the final state, Ohio, a state he was behind in all along, and where voters stood in line in the rain for hours to vote. Do you think they stood in lin in the rain for hours to vote for HIM?

    It has been proven repeatedly that these machines can be easily rigged. Yet 4 years has gone by, and here we are again. What has been done? NOTHING. No investigation, not even a government study. People control these electronic voting machines. They are programmed to produce big numbers for whoever they want them to. Are you sure the votes were counted correctly this time, or that they will be in future elections????

    January 9, 2008 01:27 pm at 1:27 pm |
  25. Gbryant

    Hillary has Michigan without a doubt.

    Go Hillary

    January 9, 2008 02:07 pm at 2:07 pm |
1 2 3 4 5