January 7th, 2008
05:10 PM ET
15 years ago

Tiny New Hampshire town first to weigh in

The CNN Ticker

Dixville Notch is steeped in campaign lore.

WASHINGTON (CNN) - The outcome of the New Hampshire primary won't be clear until late Tuesday night, but the results in one tiny Granite State town will be known much sooner – just a few minutes after the stroke of midnight.

Dixville Notch, an isolated village located in New Hampshire's northeast corner, will begin voting at the stroke of 12 a.m. Tuesday. The ballots won’t take long to tally: according to the Boston Globe, Dixville Notch has just 17 registered voters this year - three Republicans, two Democrats, and 12 independent voters.

The town, home to around 75 residents, has opened its polls shortly after midnight each election day since 1960, drawing national media attention for being the first place in this first-in-the-nation primary state to make its presidential preferences known. (Although since 1996, another small New Hampshire town - Hart's Location – reinstated its practice from the 1940's and also opened its polls at midnight.)

But the result in Dixville Notch is hardly a reliable bellwether for statewide results. The town’s Democrats picked Wesley Clark in 2004, Bill Bradley in 2000, and Bill Clinton in 1992. (John Kerry, Al Gore, and Paul Tsongas were the actual statewide winners those years.) On the Republican side, Dixville voters backed George Bush in 2000 (actual winner: John McCain) and Bob Dole in 1996 (actual winner: Bob Dole).

CNN's Tom Foreman and the Election Express are headed up to Dixville and will report the results soon as they are known.

- CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney

Filed under: New Hampshire
soundoff (119 Responses)
  1. Kokou

    For ur information. Obama won 7 votes, Edward 2, Richardson 1 and Hillary 0.


    January 8, 2008 12:15 am at 12:15 am |
  2. Bill

    Senator Obama is very convincing and has a way with words. That is great for an apprentice aspiring for a better job when they get the necessary experience under his belt.
    I will vote for Senator Clinton or the Republican candidate if he has some on the job experience.
    President is not a job with a how to manual. Experience counts!!!

    January 8, 2008 12:19 am at 12:19 am |
  3. Kendall

    I am with Hutch...Obama is all fluff and has no substance. I am voting for HRD. NOOOOBama!

    January 8, 2008 12:29 am at 12:29 am |
  4. GG, Frisco, Texas

    Joeisrightstill........I think you onto something here. It would work perfect for his campaign and the Republican couldn't bother him about experience b/c Biden is smart, funny, to the point and don't put up with alot nonsense. I can see it too ......Obama/Biden

    January 8, 2008 12:30 am at 12:30 am |
  5. Angry Californian

    OK, wait a minute... do we Americans really have it that bad? How many own their own home, have a car, health care, a job, free public education? If you have travel outside of the U.S., you will realize we don't have it so bad. BUT, we know it could be better, we have experienced better. Our reputation in the world could be better, our government more efficient and future focused. The sad truth is that anyone capable of making the appropriate and necessary changes in this country steers clear of government.

    I am undecided. Clinton...Obama...Edwards... but, saddened by some comments that reflect the candidates race and sex as a concern. How about taking that out of equation and looking at who can do the job? Has anyone of these candidates proven that? I appreciate those with facts stating them. Didn't know Obama passed so many Bills in Illinois, what were they?

    Maybe we should be concerned with who the VP is... Our current VP sure had a hand in what went on. Anyone know the percentage of Americans who actually vote. I heard it was less than 50%.

    January 8, 2008 12:35 am at 12:35 am |
  6. Tina

    If you're looking for a great candidate who is good on the campaign trail, Obama is the ticket. He's got charisma and he's smooth with the words.

    But if you're looking for a strong President who could stand up to the hard knocks, Hillary is our gal.

    Go, Hillary! You've got the brains to lead us through this extremely important transitional face. Let's not jump ahead 10 steps without looking and spouting off nice phrases. let's take one step at a time with carefully CALCULATED steps.

    Go, Hillary! She's the right person for the job right now.

    We'll see you in 8 years, Obama!

    January 8, 2008 12:42 am at 12:42 am |
  7. Shannon, Charlottesville, Virginia

    conie, are you inferring racism? i don't see how servicing the needs of the black community is racist–it does not constrain his commitment and dedication to a single demographic. this is a "low class" smear tactic. you don't get a *high-5* because you, dear, are looking very guilty of what you accuse obama of being–a racist.

    OBAMA 2008

    January 8, 2008 12:44 am at 12:44 am |
  8. Kitty, Denver, CO.

    Tom Davie

    It was: Hillary-0

    January 8, 2008 12:48 am at 12:48 am |
  9. Shannon, Charlottesville, Virginia

    since when does 'muslim background' translate to terrorist? does changing your religion disqualify a candidate? i've changed mine, and it continues to evolve. i want a president who thinks.

    January 8, 2008 12:49 am at 12:49 am |
  10. Mike, Austin Texas

    Obama is Christian not muslim. The smear of his name around him swearing on the koran was also false and the fact is that Rep. Keith Ellison swore on the Koran not Obama who used his personal bible. Obama carries a message that trascends race, that trascends political parties...not "Blue or Red states, but the United States." There is alot of hate out there, but I am proud to see that so far this nation has come together to voice that we will no longer tolerate the status quo.

    Let's make history. Be a part of history.

    Vote for a change. Vote for Obama.

    Obama/Edwards 08

    January 8, 2008 01:07 am at 1:07 am |
  11. Dustin in CA

    Obama, Edwards, and Hillary get their talking points right out of the Communist manifesto. Marx would be proud. If you want Socialism, just say so. Why don't you people just admit it?
    The "Republicans" aren't any better......just a slower path to Socialized Facism.
    Dr. Paul is the only candidate that will treat the problems and not the symptoms.
    Thanks Mary, you aren't alone.

    January 8, 2008 01:15 am at 1:15 am |
  12. MoJo

    Ask yourselves this: if the person I'm supporting were president in 2002, would the US be in Iraq today?

    Clinton: yes
    Edwards: yes
    Obama: NO

    Hillary can defend her vote all she wants, and Edwards can apologize till he's blue in the face. They got caught up in the war cry. Only Obama kept his head.

    What Americans should value most in a President is reason and foresight.

    January 8, 2008 01:37 am at 1:37 am |
  13. Janel, St. Paul, MN

    To Conie, in TX:

    You didn't study the web site of Trinity United Church of Christ, where Senator Obama and his family attends. The mission of that congregation (stated on the web site) is as follows:

    "Trinity United Church of Christ has been called by God to be a congregation that is not ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ and that does not apologize for its African roots! As a congregation of baptized believers, we are called to be agents of liberation, not only for the oppressed, but for all of God's family. We, as a church family, acknowledge that we will be building on this affirmation of "who we are" and "whose we are," call men, women, boys and girls to the liberating love of Jesus Christ, inviting them to become a part of the church universaal, responding to Jesus' command that we go into all the world and make disciples."

    January 8, 2008 01:46 am at 1:46 am |
  14. edward greenberg

    lets go with hiliary all the way.she will make a good leader.

    January 8, 2008 01:54 am at 1:54 am |
  15. Phil

    My heart actually goes out to HIllary and Bill. When you look at the big picture, they have been true to their words. If Obama were not in the race, Hillary would be a slam-dunk no-brainer. But the very thing she brags about and proclaims is the very thing that kills her, in my book: Experience.

    Experience only counts when experience is accomplishing something. Washington is full of "experience." Where has it gotten us? I have nothing negative to say about Hillary, except she is truly part of the Washington establishment. Her vote on Iraq... when Obama had both the insight and the courage to go against the grain, by not only voting against it, but foretelling precisely why it was a mistake... speaks volumes for Obama, and unfortunately... against Hillary.

    Hillary's problem is that like all of the others... Obama excluded... she plays "the game" instead of being an Obama, and following her conscience. That is the biggest problem in Washington. Too many games are being played. The time has come for someone with true leadership abilities to step into the spotlight. Someone that is seen as "believable and able" when it comes to getting away from "business as usual."

    We all remember G-Dub speaking of how he was a "uniter." History proves that this was no more than talk. He had his chance. And unfortunately, Hillary has had her chance as well, and she did not get the job done.

    The very fact that Obama has accomplished what he has to date... not to mention his track record as a State Legislator, and what he accomplished at Harvard... is substantive, and gives him tremendous credibility. Being a uniter at the state level is no small matter. If Mitt and others can point to their past successes as proof of the kind of leader they can be... why do we have a different litmus test for Obama?

    The whole argument for "experience" is actually subterfuge anyway. I don't remember who said it, but some politician already pointed out that there is no real "training" for President of the United States. There is no magic formula, and no guarantees that any specific background is a key to success. The closest test we have is ones leadership ability, and their ability to works across party lines (and ego lines) to get results.

    Were it not for Obama, Hillary would be the obvious choice. But with all that Obama brings to the table, I have more reason to chose him over HIllary, despite the fact that I do believe that Hillary is up to the task of President. Although I do not buy the argument of her being too divisive (simple rhetoric that many have been duped by), I also don't buy the experience argument. Washington is NOT lacking in the "experience" department, yet... what have the countless years of accumulated experienced netted the American people? Zero... Zip... Zilch. We all know its true.

    My heart goes out to HIllary. It should have been her turn. But as the saying goes... timing is everything. In my opinion, she has earned the right. But the bottom line is that Bush has gotten us into a mess.

    Experience did not play a role in the Democrats cowardice in letting Bush railroad them into Iraq. So why should bonus experience-points be given to Hillary... or taken away from Obama?

    Now more than ever, we need a different strategy... a different leadership style... someone who thinks outside of the "Washington Box," and someone that can truly work to bring this country together to solve the tremendous problems we now face, as a result of the Bush fiasco.

    Hillary had her chance. Sadly... the time has come for her to step aside, and give Barack a turn. In the end, when it comes to any and all politicians... all we can do is listen to what they "say," and hope they are up to the task. Sometimes they are not... but sometimes they are.

    There are never any guarantees... no matter who we chose.

    January 8, 2008 02:06 am at 2:06 am |
  16. Glenn


    January 8, 2008 05:39 am at 5:39 am |
  17. Jerry Calendine

    Neither Hillary nor Obama can win if nominated. Hillary is perceived as a witch (spelled with a "B") and Osama Obama has strong Muslim family (middle name "hussein") which America will not allow in the White House.

    January 8, 2008 09:40 am at 9:40 am |
  18. Sandy

    Iowa has picked the correct nominee twice in 40 years. NH, who cares what you think because your record isn't too much better. Anyone who votes for McCain, who is basically a Bush supporter agreeing with everything he does, is basically rubber stamping the same old politics in DC. Hillary is the best person to vote for. Hang in there Lady. These two states are nothing compared to the rest of the country. Don't give up because the rest of us have enough sense to vote for you and put the right person in DC.

    January 8, 2008 11:14 am at 11:14 am |
  19. Mark -Iowa

    Thanks to Hillary's temper tantum during last weekends debate , followed by Bills "sour grapes" outburst against Senator Obama, I have definately decided NOT to support this sorry pair of has beens. Hillary s so-called 35 years of experience has produced very little and her campaign rhetoric sounds an awful lot like a dose of status -quo. No Thank you. Will someone please show the Clinton's the door...

    Our nation is hurting. We are ready for change. "OBAMA", 2008

    January 8, 2008 05:49 pm at 5:49 pm |
1 2 3 4 5