New Hampshire so independent that few follow it

Washington Times:

The voters of New Hampshire, fiercely independent and, right now, mostly undecided, don't much care what happened last night in the Iowa caucuses, and they often flaunt their independence at the ballot box.

Only twice since 1976 has the same Democrat won both Iowa and New Hampshire in a contested nominating campaign; no Republican candidate ever won both. And more often than not, the winners of the Iowa caucuses — not the New Hampshire primary — went on to win their party's nomination.

"New Hampshire Republicans often offer a contrary voice to that of Iowa Republicans," said Dante Scala, a professor of political science at the University of New Hampshire.

Sen. John McCain of Arizona knows that fact only too well: He lost Iowa to Texas Gov. George W. Bush in 2000, then won the Granite State by 19 points, thanks in large part to independent voters. But two weeks later, he got crushed in South Carolina and disappeared from the Republican field.

With just five days to go before the primary, only a third of likely Republican voters and 42 percent of likely Democratic voters say they have picked a candidate. And because undeclared New Hampshire voters can vote in whichever primary they choose, no one really has any idea how they'll vote this time.

"How can you know which party they're going to vote in when they themselves are saying they're not sure which party they're going to vote in," Mr. McCain said with a laugh after a campaign event Wednesday in Pembroke, N.H. "There are more scenarios being discussed than I've ever seen before."

...

The one-two punch of Iowa and New Hampshire presents two very different sets of hoops for candidates to jump through. Iowa tends to push the Democratic candidates to the left and the Republican hopefuls to the right. New Hampshire Democrats, on the other hand, are less liberal, more libertarian, and the state's Republicans are politically moderate, more likely to support homosexual "marriage" and abortion rights.

...

New Hampshire is not particularly representative of the rest of the country so it should not have that much impact on the election. Its high numbers of independents can skew results for one part or the other. In 2000 it is very likely that many Democrats who did not have much of a contest, voted in the GOP primary to slow George Bush's momentum by voting for McCain. With a more heated Democrat contest, they may vote in the primary this time and leave the Republicans alone, but the GOP in New Hampshire is not as conservative as it is elsewhere, so if the non conservative wins it want be that meaningful.