David Corn: New Hampshire Voters to Pundits: We Don't Need Your Stinkin' Lanes

[babylonsister]

23 hours ago
New Hampshire Voters to Pundits: We Don’t Need Your Stinkin’ Lanes
Why the political conventional wisdom gets crushed in the Granite State.
David Corn


For over a year, many pundits and political observers who puzzle over the 2020 Democratic contest have been obsessed with the Lane Theory. It’s a simple notion: There are different lanes in the race—one for moderates, one for progressives, maybe one for a new face, and so on. This has dominated much of the analysis. Think of the Road Warrior movies: Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are in a death race in the lefty lane; Joe Biden, Pete Buttigieg, and Michael Bloomberg are in their own demolition derby in the centrist lane, with Amy Klobuchar trying to jump the median and get into that mix. That all seems to make sense. Except for this: voters don’t live in lanes.

Meet Michele Vilamarim, a 56-year-old homemaker who lives in Nashua, New Hampshire. On Thursday afternoon, she was at a packed American Legion hall in Merrimack, where Buttigieg was holding a town hall focused on veterans issues. The place was full of Buttigieg supporters. But many attendees, like Vilamarim, were voters who did not know how they are going to vote on Tuesday. And what was most interesting to an outsider (that is, me) was that the undecideds were undecided in a way that did not fit into lanes. One local physician said she was torn between Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Warren, and Tom Steyer. Seriously. She could go in any direction. How was she going to make a choice? She shrugged: “I have no idea.” A school teacher said she could vote for Biden, Warren, Klobuchar, or Andrew Yang. Really?

snip//

Vilamarim was in no lane. And as Holly Shulman, a longtime Democratic Party official in New Hampshire told me, this is not unusual. “Voters here don’t respond that much to debates and big speeches. If people canvass and make it through the snow to their door, that counts. Small interactions—which may seem imperceptible to those looking at the big picture—can do the trick. It’s all about these interactions.” And it is hard to calculate the accumulation of all these interactions.

That may be particularly so this time around. The Iowa results and the subsequent polls show that the Democratic Party is highly fractured, with many of its voters caring more about dethroning Donald Trump than they do about a specific candidate. Sanders may be leading an overthrow-the-system revolution, and Buttigieg may be leading a let’s-come-together crusade—each claiming he can bring new voters to the polls for the Democrats—yet turnout was down in Iowa. And neither of them assembled a dominant plurality. Will New Hampshire voters turn the party in a decisive direction? And if so, will it have an ideological or thematic component? That is, will they flood a lane?

No one voter can symbolize what’s happening in the Granite State. And there is certainly a set of voters who are torn between Sanders and Warren and another group struggling over Biden and Buttigieg. But this first-in-the-nation primary more resembles the parking lot in a stadium at the end of the big game then a super highway with bright white lines.

more...

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/02/why-new-hampshire-voters-defy-political-lanes-theory/

[we can do it]

1. I think this may be more widespread than NH.

[KPN]

2. Me too. Heck, I like Sanders, Warren, Buttigieg, Klobuchar and Yang. And I feel like I want to

know more about Bloomberg and Steyer! Who's out? Only Joe for me at this point. Yikes!

[True Blue American]

3. I heard the head of the New Hampshire Party

Say it would be nothing like the caucus but 2 states that are not representative of the rest of the country was outdated!

I agree.

[BlueIdaho]

4. Given the burning desire

Of Democrats and independents to get rid of Trump I’m not surprised. I really think the platform nuances of individual candidates comes in a distant second to tossing the lunatic out of the White House.

[BusyBeingBest]

5. IMO, most non-politically-obsessed people vote for whom they like personally.

Some quality, be it authenticity, strength, or that a candidate cares about people like them. It doesn't make sense to pundits and analysts because there's no logic to it.

[gulliver]

6. It's because the news is a business.

The idea of lanes (and many others) gives the business a manageable "product." It's fairly grotesque.