January 10th, 2008
06:05 AM ET
10 years ago

The Best Political Podcast


(CNN) - New Hampshire's first-in-the-nation primary anointed two new front-runners – Sens. Hillary Clinton, D-New York, and John McCain, R-Arizona.

In the latest Best Political Podcast, Senior Political Correspondent Candy Crowley reports on the Granite State primary results, Senior Political Analyst Bill Schneider delves into CNN's New Hampshire exit polling data, and Dan Lothian previews the contest for the black vote in the critical South Carolina Democratic primary.

Plus, Sen. Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, discuss New Hampshire's results and some controversial primary eve comments by former President Bill Clinton.

Click here to subscribe to the Best Political Podcast.

–CNN Associate Producer Martina Stewart

soundoff (44 Responses)
  1. jack, ny, ny

    January 9, 2008 11:51 pm ET

    How legitimate are these NH primary voter fraud allegations?

    As most of you know in NH you can register to vote on the spot.

    Did the Clintons bring in bus loads of their Washington cronies and lobbyist buddies to vote in NH?

    I guess when a former President’s vicious tirade of fabrications and Senator 'Experience' tearing up when inevitability seemed less inevitable were not enough, the Clinton Machine needed to implement their contingency plan.

    D- please don't be sour loser!!!! At least Clinton supporters were gracious enough to accept Iowa results. They were crying foul. This just shows what and who is obama supporters...childern.

    January 10, 2008 09:27 am at 9:27 am |
  2. Dwayne, Pa

    The reason why 2% of Americans make 98% of the money in this country is because 98% of Americans are too hesitant to CHANGE. It is a fact that human nature is to stick to routine.
    This is why Hillary Clinton is back in the lead. Too many Americans are afraid of CHANGE. CHANGE makes people uncomfortable.
    But for the 2% that are making most of the money, they do so because they seek CHANGE. They do not settle for routine.
    As for the experience factor, yes, Hillary Clinton has experience. But, if I am fielding a football team, and I have a choice between the years of experience of Vinny Testaverdi, and the talent of Tom Brady, I am going with the talent!
    Barack Obama can bring talent to the highest position in the land. He can bring change to this country. He can FINALLY get Washington away from this "two sides of the aisle" and bring everyone to the center aisle to get things accomplished.
    We cannot believe that Hillary Clinton can do the same as she is constantly mentioning her "fighting" with the "other side of the aisle".
    Fighting with the "other side of the aisle" is going to accomplish little more than we have seen for too long.
    If you truly want things to change, you cannot expect part of the problem to change the problem.

    January 10, 2008 09:28 am at 9:28 am |
  3. Truth Seeker

    Am I the only one that noticed that Obama actually won on delegates, so basically he is the winner. Popularity votes don't win you anything, just ask Gore. Also am I the only one that noticed that Billary has been constantly "retooling" her campaign whenever she starts slipping in the polls. She found her voice, never knew she lost it. Her goal is to get to the White House at any cost, constant flip flopping to get votes show everyone that she is NOT the one for the job. Remember that we the people are hiring to fill the job of president. Would anyone of us hire a person who lies to our face, uses emotions to get what they want, and rides the coat tails of a past leader. We need a person strong enough to lead on there own. Billary is NOT that person. The big picture is, would other countries take the USA serious if she was the leader? The country might be ready for a woman leader, but Hillary is NOT the right one.

    January 10, 2008 09:44 am at 9:44 am |
  4. teresa

    A victory is a victory. Obama's camp has attempted to avoid race as a factor. Just as soon as Hillary wins, the race card is played by not Obama, but his surrogates. Referring to the polls being so wrong. So it poses a question, if not several. If the exit polls were not right and our fellow americans from New Hampshire lied about voting for a african american, then can we not say that the remarks coming from South Carolina Obama camp is truely racist. So it is true and will be true, that the african americans in South Carolina will vote the majority for obama because he is an african american, not that he is compotent and ready to be president. He says the same thing George Bush said in the 2000 campaign, just he a little younger and far more articulate. Nothing better than a good word spinner. Hillary gets my vote.

    January 10, 2008 09:59 am at 9:59 am |
  5. dem89

    Obama gives a bunch of fake speeches that give no details about his plans and programs because they are socialistic. Look at his campaign website. Under him the middle class will be destroyed to help the pandering poor.

    No thanks

    January 10, 2008 10:16 am at 10:16 am |
  6. Teresa

    I am appalled at the suggestion that Obama lost the NH Primary simply because of his race. If Edwards had won NH I could understand the argument. However, woman have traditionally been discriminated against just as African-Americans have. Have we forgotten that there was a time when women were not allowed to vote in this country and had to fight for their rights as well? I can't help but feel that there are many Americans who are just as hesitant to put a woman in the White House as they are an African-American. Both candidates would make history if elected. I also can't help but feel that there are many African-Americans who will vote for Obama simply because of his race and not because of the issues at hand.

    January 10, 2008 10:20 am at 10:20 am |
  7. Jimmy from colorado

    I think i would better explain what went wrong to the polls suggesting early victory to Obama.First of all the polls were not wrong at all the polls showed Sen.Edward would get 17% and obviously he got it.The polls also showed Sen.Obama would get 38 % and remember margin of error was +/-4 so mathematically Obama could get 34% to 42% and it was exactly he got 37%.These polls showed obama ahead of Sen.Clinton by 8 to 10 points.All these polls didnt calculate correctly.Lets calculate Edward with 17 Obama with 38 and clinton with 30 and others 5 the total is 90 obviously these polls didnt show where were these 10% and this is the reason confuses people.10% are undecided voters and late deciders.
    The second point is that there are people who suggest race was a factor for Obama to lose.some suggest gender too was issue.But it is not true.
    I have scientific proof why obama lost.
    No.1.Media:The predictions of media that Obama would lead Clinton by double digit influenced lots of Democrats who like both Clinton and Obama.to vote for Clinton.Why?These democrats like both candidates and its hard for them to chose who is the best after realizing that obama would win by any means.They realized that if Obama won by many points it would be end of Clinton.These are people who would like to hear more about this campaign,they want to know candidates more and they are enthusiastic about issues. they didnt want this democrat race to end so soon.They voted for clinton to narrow the gap.Even if clinton lost by few points she would still have momentum to go on.
    No.2.Economy.Remember clinton always says Bush uses terror as to create fears among voters to vote for him.Sen.Clinton used fear on economy to threaten voters that soon there would be recession,and many people who like Obama and would vote for him decided to vote for Clinton because they think Clintons are good to fix economy.
    No.3.Bill clinton.This is the most liar person in USA.remember he can sell ice to eskimos.This is the guy who lied under oath.Bill clinton attacked Obama hardly by suggesting that obama is flip flopper on many issues including Iraq war.The truth of matter is Obama voted for fund for war to support the troops not to support the war.Many people bought this idea and they went for clinton.

    January 10, 2008 11:14 am at 11:14 am |
  8. Mark R. Fort Lauderdale FL

    Thank God other people are starting to see it. Obama talks and talks but doesn't say anything! It's all fluff, no substance.

    January 10, 2008 03:08 pm at 3:08 pm |
  9. pam Eugene OR

    Hillary is for Hillary and no one else! This is all about her ego and sense of entitlement. She believe that by staying with Bill after the many humiliating things he put her through she has earned the Presidency. Well Bill was the one jumping every woman around and he probably owes her a lot for that: BUT we don't don't. Just because she made the decision to stay with a liar and a cheater does not mean the American people owe her anything! I want and need hope in my future and Hillary is neither. She is the same old tired crap.
    I am a woman very near her age and she will never get my vote. I will vote for a Republican before I see her back in my WH. Please ladies, how are you so blinded by the fake woman? Do you know what she will do if she is elected? I do...she will rip this country apart and we will have 4 more years of hatred and nothing getting done. Think women, please more more of the same Bush, Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush Bush, Clinton. Don't you think we deserve our country back from the these liars?

    January 10, 2008 07:27 pm at 7:27 pm |
  10. K-Romeo

    If you havebeen apart of the past, you havebeen apart of the problem. The change we need isn't that of a black president but and honest president with new ideas and visions, and that candidate is, Obama. I would be ashame if I was Hillary or any of the other candidates to say they have experiece and have served time in the office making changes. What I'm trying to say is, look at our world today and were it stands, and listen to the candidates bragging about being apart of bringing it to this place. A lot of people just don't get it, especially the other candidates. If Obama was white or any other race I would support him for his belief, his vision, and most important of all, his inexperience. I really wouldn't support him if he had the kind of experience that have our country in the state its in today. New ideas, new visions is what we need and if a white, black, mexican or other can bring this about, I'm all for him. K-Romeo Southfield MI

    January 10, 2008 07:37 pm at 7:37 pm |
  11. Fanner 50

    Did anyone ever consider that the two party system is really just ONE big fraud on the American people.I think they just take turns lying to us all.

    January 11, 2008 12:17 am at 12:17 am |
  12. ibrahim vitalinks

    Again we must remind ourselves that the issues at stake is beyong Obama or Clinton.We are talking about issues that change the world, indeed, America for the better.We are talking about ability and capability.Does Clinton has these qualities.No.Does Obama has these qualities? YES.Obama represent generational change.He is agent of change between the past and present of America.Obama is the hope of the future.We must support him now.No emotions. No complain.Vote OBAMA EVERYWHERE YOU ARE IN AMERICA NOW

    January 11, 2008 07:27 am at 7:27 am |
  13. The Observer

    My instincts are not to trust Obama – not that I trust Clinton that much either. But I suppose at least with Clinton you know what you are getting and you know how she stands on the major policy issues – even if you disagree with her.

    Obama is an altogether different matter – there is something of ex British Prime Minister Tony Blair about him – all style and no real substance – a superficial politician whose campaign strategy seems to be based on election because of who he's not and because he is "young" – that last one really gets on my nerves.

    It is similar to the strategy that the young fogies Cameron and Osborne have adopted with the Tories here in the UK – say little about policy, elect me because I'm not X, vote for me because I am younger (in comparison). The reality is that Obama, Cameron and Osborne have as much in common with young people as I have.

    It is symtomatic of the all style and no substance approach not just of politicians but of anyone who is in the public eye.

    January 11, 2008 08:02 am at 8:02 am |
  14. Anonymous

    I find it appalling that people in New Hampshire voted to nominate someone who potentially could lead the most powerful nation in the free world because she cried. I also find it very disturbing that there is evidence that indicates poor whites couldn't bring themselves to vote for a black candidate. To see Bill Clinton distort Obama's voting record and call it a fairy tale after he lied under oath and said to the American people with such conviction "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" is difficult to stomach. He is not credible and if Obama wasn't as classy and sincerely genuine about change he would bring up the corruption and sleaze of the Bill and Hillary presidency. The Clinton's will say or do anything to regain the White House. As a neighbour to the north I implore the remaining states to rebuke the idiocy of New Hampshire and put and end to this campaign of lies and distortion by the Clinton campaign.

    January 11, 2008 09:43 am at 9:43 am |
  15. bill

    I have a great idea. Just have CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, and FOX cast their votes and be done with it! I mean whoever they want at a particular time in the process is who will benefit. The question is will the media ever disclose any of Obama"s credentials or will he be given a free ride to the Whitehouse. I hope he loses just so the press doesn't have an invitation to the party.

    January 11, 2008 01:06 pm at 1:06 pm |
  16. NewPatriot-Arizona

    Ron Paul for President 2008 ! The only candidate that understands the U.S. Constitution. The choice is clear !

    January 11, 2008 02:02 pm at 2:02 pm |
  17. henna jan

    ha ha ha ha ha wo wo ho ho ho ho ha lmao so funy CNN THE BEST poliical
    news team. ha haha ha ha

    January 13, 2008 12:28 pm at 12:28 pm |
  18. RAFi68


    January 14, 2008 12:11 pm at 12:11 pm |
  19. vince

    I just made a comment about ron paul and was told it was a duplicate.Thats funny I don't see any comments about ron in the comment area.come on guys I know I'm not the only one takkeing a look at dr paul

    January 15, 2008 04:51 pm at 4:51 pm |
1 2