Hillary Clinton Pulls Out A Tight Victory in NH

Congratulations to Hillary Clinton. You Go Girl!

NBC has called New Hampshire for Hillary. AP News is also calling it for Clinton. Update: It’s official.


As a woman, I gotta say, I couldn’t be more thrilled to see Hillary pull this off.  This race isn’t over yet. I had tears in my eyes when I heard the results, because as a woman there’s something so inspiring about seeing Hillary turn this around.

Barack Obama is giving a great concession speech: “Change is what’s happening in America.”

Olbermann: “The polls were so wrong.”

Hillary is at the podium… ” I come tonight with a very, very full heart. I want especially to thank NH… over the last week I listened to you and in the process I found my own voice.”… “We’re gonna take what we’ve learned here in NH and we’re going to rally on. We’re in for the long run. This is for the American people.” … “We came back tonight because you spoke loudly and clearly. You want this campaign to be about you. Because there is so much at stake.”

Bookmark and Share

About Pamela Leavey

Pamela Leavey is the Editor in Chief, Owner/Publisher of The Democratic Daily as well as a freelance writer and photographer. Pamela holds a certificate in Contemporary Communications from UMass Lowell, a Journalism Certificate from UMass Amherst and a B.A. in Creative Writing and Digital Age Communications from UMass Amherst UWW.
Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Hillary Clinton Pulls Out A Tight Victory in NH

  1. Jeanne says:

    There is nothing to be happy about. We are not going forward we are going backwards. The Clintons politics again. I especailly feel bad for the young people who dared to believe in a better vision for our Country

  2. Jeanne

    There’s nothing wrong with letting the people decide in as many states as possible. That is supposed to be what this is about.

  3. Indie Liberal says:

    Jeanne Said: on January 8th, 2008 at 9:44 pm

    There is nothing to be happy about. We are not going forward we are going backwards. The Clintons politics again. I especailly feel bad for the young people who dared to believe in a better vision for our Country.

    I agree with you. I would like to support Hillary, but the knifing the dem in the back thing, well I won’t go there, but will congratulate her.

    Though I am looking at other candidates, but plan to vote for the nominee, I think it will be too bad that the punditocracy and others will bash the last two campaigns (2000 and 2004) just to promote the 08 candidates. That is tacky and it’s what is keeping me from fully supporting someone right now.

  4. The pundits and media tonight discussed a multitude of campaigns, not just the last 2. That is what they do. It’s part and parcel of politics and politicians are fully aware of that and I believe at this point take it better than supporters.

    Personally I’m judging the candidates on their stance on the issues. We have 3 wonderful candidates who all deserve a shot at this. None are my first choice, and so because my first choice isn’t in the running I would prefer to see this play out and let the race develop rather have it decided on 1 or 2 contests.

  5. Senator Clinton is both intelligent and capable. If she becomes the Democratic nominee, I will definitely vote for her. However, anyone who thinks her candidacy represents real change is seriously disillusioned!
    Her presidency will represent a return to the past, not the promise of the future. Remember when Bill Clinton was running back in 1992? One of his campaign slogans was elect Bill and “You will get two for the price of one.” In essence they were saying that Hillary will be a vital part of any Bill Clinton presidency. You certainly don’t hear the Clinton camp using this endorsement in 2008. They would rather have us believe that her spouse, although a two term ex-president, will have no influence over executive decisions. Please wake up. The election of Hillary represents a quasi third term for Bill. So, how will the return of one of our countries two ruling families represent change? Do we really crave a monarchy rather than a democracy? Papa Bush was vice-president for eight years and then president for four. Bill Clinton followed with an eight year, two term presidency. Then, of course, we have had Baby Bush, a.k.a. “The Decider” for eight. If Hillary wins, we face the prospect of the Clinton’s for eight more years. This would mean that The House of Bush and The House of Clinton will have been a part of our executive branch for 36 years. Perhaps then Jeb could get elected and we could continue this two family cycle for 44 years. Does this sound like change? If we desire a monarchy this much, perhaps Queen Elizabeth would agree to rule over her former colonies!
    Barack Obama is the only candidate who is on record as opposing the Iraq War from the beginning. His camapign has been funded almost solely on individual contributions. He has made it abundantly clear that his administration would neither be beholding to the unions of large corporations. He is not a member of the hard core D.C. political beltway. His savy, charisma, and experience are on a par to Senator Clinton’s. Here is a young candidate that embodies CHANGE and not more of the same old thing. Most of my GOP friends are hopeing for Hillary to be our nominee. She carries with her all the baggage of Bill’s presidency. I feel that their claim that Hillary would be easier to defeat than Barack is an accurate one. Although I will vote for any democratic nominee, I fear that if it’s Senator Clinton, a republican will return to the White House.

  6. William A. Stoddart

    I think Hillary Clinton has a track record of her own in the Senate that sets her apart from Bill Clinton.

    In ’04 the biggest factor for me with JK was his experience and his stance on the issues. 2nd was his idealism and the hope factor.

    I wish I felt that a candidate had both of those qualities to the extent that JK does, this time around but I don’t. The way I see it – Clinton has the experience and Obama has the idealism.

    Change doesn’t just come from idealism, it also comes from hard work and experience. Obama just doesn’t have in my book the experience Clinton has. It’s a tough call. Regardless both are better than what we have now.

    I will say also that the Clinton years were good years in my book. Good for the economy.

  7. john stone says:

    I agree with you Pamela!!

  8. Pingback: The Democratic Daily