Tags
Glow, Manhattan, Midtown, New York, New York City, night, Skyline, travel, Travel Photography, Weehawken
Manhattan Glow
Camera: Canon 6D
Lens: EF 24-105mm f 4 L
Focal length: 73mm
Aperture: f 4
Shutter: 0.6 seconds
ISO: 800
18 Thursday Feb 2016
Posted Cityscapes, Night Photography, Photo of the Day, Photography, Travel Photography
inTags
Glow, Manhattan, Midtown, New York, New York City, night, Skyline, travel, Travel Photography, Weehawken
Manhattan Glow
Camera: Canon 6D
Lens: EF 24-105mm f 4 L
Focal length: 73mm
Aperture: f 4
Shutter: 0.6 seconds
ISO: 800
17 Wednesday Feb 2016
Posted Landscapes, Photo of the Day, Photography, Travel Photography
inTags
Cape Elizabeth, Coast, Fog, HDR, Image, Light, lighthouse, Maine, New England, Portland, Portland Head Light, Road Trip, travel
As the Fog Lifts
The Portland Head Light in Cape Elizabeth, Maine is America’s oldest lighthouse. It was commissioned in 1787 by President George Washington.
Last August, I spent some time in Maine. This landmark was on top of my list of places to photography. I had done some research in Instagram and Flickr and I had hoped to photograph the lighthouse during the sunrise. When I got there, you could not see the lighthouse from the parking lot. The building and the rocks were covered by thick fog. Rather than driving back to my in-laws’ house, I decided to sit down, enjoy the scene, and see if the rising temperature could burn off some of the fog. I was rewarded for my patience and I took this shot as the fog started to lift.
I will return to this lighthouse later this year. I really want to add a sunrise photograph to my collection. But I am very happy with this result. It is unique in many ways and I love the warm tones on the right side of the frame, created by the rising sun, and the cool tones in the left side of the frame. I also like the fact that the side of the lighthouse is lit by soft light, while the shadows add a sense of depth to the image.
This is an HDR image. I took three exposures (-2, 0 & +2) and I merged them using Lightroom 6. I also used OnOne’s Perfect Effects 9.0 to bump up the midtones and add a little bit of sharpness on the rocks.
Camera: Canon 6D
Lens: EF 24-105mm f4 L
Focal Length: 35mm
Aperture: f 10
Shutter: 1/125
ISO: 100
16 Tuesday Feb 2016
Posted Landscapes, Photography, Travel Photography
inTags
beach, Clouds, El Escambron, Old San Juan, Puerto Rico, Rocks, San Juan, Sunset, Tourism, travel
Waiting for the sunset in El Escambron, a public beach a few minutes from Old San Juan. In the distance you can see the Capitol’s dome and the ligthhouse on top of El Morro. I captured this image on Christmas Eve (2015).
Camera: Canon T2i
Lens: EF-S 18-55mm f 3.5-5.6 IS
Focal Length: 18mm (~28mm equivalent in a full frame sensor)
Aperture: f 16
Shutter: 1/400 of a second
ISO: 320
15 Monday Feb 2016
Posted Cityscapes, Photography, Travel Photography
in
La Capilla de Cristo – Old San Juan, Puerto Rico. This small chapel was built in the mid 1700s.
I recently made a large print of this photo and it is now hanging in my dinning room. I photographed this small church a few minutes after the sunrise earlier this year. Actually, this is an HDR image. I took three exposures (-2, 0 and +2) and merged them in Lightroom.
Camera: Canon 6D
Lens: Rokinon 14mm f 2.8
Aperture: f 11
Shutter: 1//50th of a second (for the base image)
ISO: 100
13 Saturday Feb 2016
Tags
Maine, morning, New England, night, railroad, starry, stars, tracks, travel, Unity, Unity Pond, winter
“A Starry Morning” – I captured this photograph 35 minutes before the sunrise in Unity, Maine.
I love astrophotography and I as noted in previous posts I can’t wait for spring. This image is actually one of my first photographs of the stars. I was visiting my in-laws for Christmas (2014) and for a few days I tried to take some pictures of the Milky Way. But, it was the wrong time of the year for Milky Way shots – I had a lot to learn!
But, I did find a nice spot thanks to the work of Mike Taylor, a Maine-based astrophotographer who’s work is just amazing. One of his photo’s of the Aurora Borealis was captured in the Unity Pond.
Unity is pretty close to Bangor so I decided to explore the area. I left my in-laws’ house at 3:00am and I took photos around the towns of Brooks and Unity. It was a night of experimentation, which means that I made a ton of mistakes.
After braving the cold temperatures and driving around looking for places to photograph – another mistake in my part – I saw the entrance to Unity Pond and I decided to check it out.
Here is one of the photos. I love the composition, but I wished I had captured this photo a few hours earlier. Oh well, I figure this is just another excuse to revisit this place.
Camera: Canon 6D
Lens: EF 24-105mm f 4 L
Focal Length: 24mm
Aperture: f 4
Shutter: 20 seconds
ISO: 12,800
12 Friday Feb 2016
Tags
Acadia National Park, Bernie Sanders, Bernie2016, delegates, Democratic, Democratic National Committee, Establishment, Feelthebern, Fundraising, Hillary Clinton, Hillary2016, imwithher, Liberal, New Hampshire, Primary, Progressive, superdelegates
Bernie Sanders’ victory in the New Hampshire democratic primary was nothing short of impressive. The Vermont Senator’s win has raised serious questions about Hillary Clinton’s electability. This does not mean that Sanders will secure the nomination. But, the fact that he beat the former Secretary of State by 22% signals two crucial things. First, his message is gaining traction with many Americans. Second, Sanders has been able to raise the necessary funding to a establish very nimble campaign that has outperformed Clinton’s more expensive political organization. While Sanders still faces some serious challenges going into Nevada and South Carolina, his win demonstrates that Sanders is not a mere fringe candidate.
It would be foolhardy to dismiss his victory as “a matter of geography” – an explanation peddled by Clinton’s surrogates in the closing days of the race. It is true that the majority of New Hampshire primary-goers have supported the presidential aspirations of candidates of neighboring states. But this justification insults New Hampshire voters’ intellect. In New Hampshire, voters study their candidates very carefully, they expect the candidates to spend a lot of time answering their questions, and they usually make-up their minds late in the game.
While both of them were well known in the state, New Hampshire voters have been instrumental in “Clintonworld”. Who can forget the 1992 primary when New Hampshirites helped Bill Clinton secure an improbable second place finish, reenergizing his campaign. Or Hillary Clinton’s 2008 come-from-behind victory in a crowded race, stunning Barack Obama’s campaign and giving her campaign a needed boost. While Sanders was well known in the Granite State, Clinton had the upper hand in terms of name recognition.
In addition, Clinton’s support from the state’s Democratic establishment was a huge advantage. And while it is true that voters across the nation are frustrated with the political establishment, candidates spend a lot of time trying to gain these endorsements. For starters, these endorsements can reduce the costs of setting up a campaign. More importantly, and this point relates to the Democratic nomination process, candidates are not only competing for popular votes but also for superdelegates’ support.
A Little Side Note | How big of an advantage are endorsements? Before New Hampshire primary-goers casted their ballots, Clinton had already won the support of six out of the Granite State’s eight superdelegates. Thus, although Sanders won the popular vote by 22%, earning 15 pledge delegates, Clinton still managed to secure 15 total delegates – nine pledge delegates plus the aforementioned six superdelegates. Superdelegates can change their minds in the future. Although given the divisions in the party, it is unlikely that this will happen until later in the nomination process. |
Given these advantages, Clinton should not have lost by 22%.In fact, a few days before the primary, Jeff Woodburn, one of the state’s top democratic leader, told the National Review’s Brenan Borderlon, that Clinton was going to do better than people expected, saying: “This is not going to be a 20-point race. I think it is going to be closer than that, and I think she’s going to get the momentum to go forward.” Like I said in earlier posts (here and here), she could have claimed a moral victory had she been able to win the vote of registered Democrats or close his lead to under 10%.
In the end, Sanders’ impressive victory is not only connected to the strength of his message but his campaign’s ground operations. The fact that he was able to build a political organization that rivaled Clinton’s is a noteworthy accomplishment. Let’s look at some facts.
An ABC News report shows that the Sanders campaigned opened 18 field offices, while the Clinton campaign only open 11. In terms of get-out-of-the-vote centers, the Clinton campaign had eight to Sanders’ 30. A Politico story also noted that the Sanders campaign spent $8.5 million and the Clinton campaign spent $7.8 million. In terms of media buys in the closing weeks before the primary, the Clinton camp spent $800,000, while team Sanders spent $2.8 million. While these numbers suggest that the Clinton campaign was outspent, these figures do not take into account SuperPAC spending on behalf of the Clinton campaign. According to Reid Nielson of Morning Consult, total Clinton spending was closer to $10.8 million.
While each campaign’s spending totals demonstrate the importance each placed on winning New Hampshire, these figures obscure the fact that the Sanders campaign’s fundraising prowess trumped the Clinton campaign’s strategy. It seems that in the closing days of the campaign, the Clinton campaign did not have the resources to match its rival’s efforts and the result was a big loss that has not only raised questions about her electability, but also about her campaign’s ability to adapt to the new contours of the race.
While Sanders’ message has energized liberals in the United States, what sets him apart from other fringe candidates is that his campaign has the resources to mount a national campaign. In Iowa and New Hampshire, voters expect the candidates to spend a lot of time in their states talking about the issues. But because the upcoming schedule of caucus and primaries prevent this type of politicking, media advertising will be even more important. The Sanders campaign’s ability to raise more than $30 million since 1 January in small donors contributions must be keeping Clinton and her advisers awake at night.
So far, the Sanders campaign has proven to be more nimble that Clinton’s. Indeed, the Sanders campaign’s overhead costs are lower. Based on campaign finance records, the Washington Post recently reported that in 2015 Sanders “spent $5.4 million on payroll to her $25.4 million and $400,402 on travel to Clinton’s $1.8 million.” According to an article in the Hufftington Post, the Sanders campaign spent less than $1 million polling, while the Clinton campaign seems to have spent between $2.8 to $3.3 million for these services.
Difference between each campaign’s expenses can be explained by each campaign’s fundraising strategies. Off her reported 700 staffers, a lot of them are dedicated to fundraising. This contrasts with Sanders’ decision not to build a fundraising team, primarily relying on online donations. Because she has mostly relied on big donors, Clinton has spent a lot more time on the road fundraising than Sanders has – hence her higher travel budget.
So not only did Sanders bringing in more money than the Clinton campaign, but because his campaign has less overhead costs, he can dedicate more resources to advertising, travel and ground operations. This reality will force the Clinton campaign to increase fundraising efforts and take her out of the campaign trail. The last thing she wants to do is meet with her big donors, which have strong connections to Wall Street or corporate America. Attending opulent fundraising parties will also send the wrong signal to many voters who think Clinton is an out of touch politician who does not understand the struggles of middle class and working class Americans.
So why did Sanders’ win the New Hampshire by such a big margin? His campaign did what many political commentators thought impossible. It outspent the Clinton campaign and it built a very nimble political organization that has the financial resources and capacity to develop sophisticated ground operations to target voters and to get them out to vote. Can he replicate this formula in the upcoming caucuses and primaries? Will the Clinton campaign adapt to Sanders’ strategy? Only time will tell. But Sander’s impressive victory in New Hampshire demonstrates, that his campaign has all the elements of a winning strategy – a clear message, energized supporters, lots of money, and the capacity to organize a sophisticated ground game.
11 Thursday Feb 2016
Posted Landscapes, Photo of the Day, Travel Photography
inTags
Barn, Canon, Canon6D, Grand Teton, Grand Teton National Park, HDR, High Dynamic Range, Landmark, Lightroom, Mormon Historic District, morning, Moulton Homestead, Mountains, National Park, Panorama, sunrise, Wyoming
This panoramic photograph was taken a few minutes after the sunrise in Grand Teton National Park. In the foreground is the Moulton Homestead part of the Mormon Historic District. In the background is the Teton Range.
This was one of the most magical sunrises of my life. The light was just perfect. My roadtrip to Wyoming, which I did with my Dad, was one of those life changing experiences. I had never seen the Rocky Mountains and I was awed by their sheer size and their beauty. Spending time with my Dad was also very special.
How I made this photograph? Using a very steady tripod (I actually weighted it down with sandbags), I took 9 set of 3 exposures (-2, 0 and +2). I then merged each set of photographs into a single HDR image using Lightroom 6’s HDR merge. Once I had the 9 HDR images, I then stitched them into a panorama, using Lightroom’s new feature. After that, I used OnOne’s Perfect Effects to punch the colors and off to Photoshop to clean up the image of some signs next to the building and one or two individuals how walked into some of the frames.
For this image, I used my Canon 6D and the EF 24-105mm. All shots were captured vertically and the focal length was set at 85mm. The settings for the base exposure were the following: f 9, 1/20th of a second and ISO 100.
I really love this photo, though it was a lot of work. I am thinking of printing this one big, really big!
10 Wednesday Feb 2016
Tags
Bernie Sanders, Bernie2016, Democratic, Democratic National Committee, Democratic Party, FITN, Hillary Clinton, Hillary2016, Liberal, New Hampshire, Primary, Progressive
I noted on the eve of the New Hampshire Democratic primary that Bernie Sanders would win the contest. But, I wondered whether Hillary Clinton could still use the results to claim some sort of moral victory that would help her soften the blow and reassure her donors and supporters that the loss was just a small setback. I wrote that her campaign had to accomplish at least two goals.
First, it had to close Sanders’ lead in the polls. Most political commentators were sure that the Vermont Senator would win, but the question was by how much. The Real Clear Politics average of averages had Sanders winning by 13% and some polls were predicting a tighter race. History tells us that many New Hampshire voters make-up their minds late in the game and it was possible that undecided voters could break towards Clinton at the 11th hour. In fact, the CNN/WMUR poll of 8 February stressed that 15% of voters were undecided, while 21% were “leaning toward one candidate”. Had she closed the gap, the post-primary commentary would not have been that Sanders made history, but that he underperformed in the primary of a neighboring state.
I argued that Clinton’s second goal was to win the vote of registered Democrats, as she had done in the Iowa caucus. Because many of the future caucuses and primaries are closed to independent voters, the Clinton campaign could have at least claimed that her message was energizing the Democratic base, assuring her donors and supporters that she would lock the nomination by mid-March. As noted below, she slightly lost this key vote, raising questions about her message and strategy going into Nevada and South Carolina.
Let us be clear Sanders’ win was nothing short of impressive. Not only did he win by 22%, outperforming the forecasts, but he also pierced the Clinton campaign’s belief that it could wrap up the nomination by the end of March. This will be a very long battle. While Clinton has many advantages going into the next races, it would be wrong to ignore the fact that in 2016 the Sanders campaign has outperformed her in terms of fundraising and ground operations and that his message resonates with a larger part of the electorate.
Clinton’s tie in Iowa and her loss in New Hampshire show that Clinton has many problems that need to be addressed. Let’s dig into the exit polls’ numbers to see exactly why she has failed to stop Sanders’ rise.
Iowa | New Hampshire | |||
Clinton | Sanders | Clinton | Sanders | |
Electability (20% in IA v. 12% in NH) | 77% | 17% | 79% | 20% |
Cares (26% in IA v. 27% in NH) | 22% | 74% | 17% | 82% |
Honesty (24% in IA v. 34% in NH) | 10% | 83% | 6% | 92% |
Experience (28% in IA v. 26% in NH) | 88% | 9% | 84% | 15% |
Needless to say, Clinton scores high marks in both experience and electability. But these numbers also show that she is not connecting with voters, especially those who question her honesty and believe she does not really care about their issues. What is surprising is that the numbers actually got slightly worse in the week between the Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary despite her attempts in the campaign trail and during the MSNBC to correct this perception.
The fact that more people chose “honesty” as their top candidate quality in New Hampshire than in Iowa signals that the Clinton campaign’s coordinated attacks against Sanders’ character and his record may have backfired. It also demonstrate that Sanders’ debate performance successfully highlighted contradictions in Clinton’s record.
The next question once again addresses voters’ perceptions of the candidates’ honesty and trustworthiness. The table below explains that a majority of voters believe that both candidates are honest and trustworthy. However, a majority of Sanders’ supporters question Clinton’s on these two traits.
Only Clinton (7%) | Only Sanders (50%) | Both (39%) | Neither (3%) | |
Clinton | n/a | 3% | 72% | n/a |
Sanders | n/a | 96% | 27% | n/a |
Other | n/a | 1% | 1% | n/a |
These findings once again suggests that her campaign’s attacks failed to sway voters away from Sanders. They also raise questions as to why people participating in a Democratic caucus or primary are challenging her credibility. Could it be the lingering effects of the Benghazi scandal or her problems with the private email server? Perhaps. But, I think the big problem may be Clinton’s connections to Wall Street and those speeches she gave at Goldman Sachs and other financial firms.
In addition, these results also indicate that the growing animosity between Clinton and Sanders may make it very difficult for Clinton to mobilize his supporters, if she wins the nomination. At the same time, these findings demonstrate that Clinton supporters see Sanders as honest and trustworthy, signifying that if he clinches the nomination, he will have an easier time bringing Clinton’s supporters into his tent.
Could Sanders win the nomination? His “yuge” win in New Hampshire has changed the dynamics of the race and it is clear that the Sanders campaign will have the funds and the energy to continue fighting to Democratic National Convention. Yet, there are many unknowns going forward for team Sanders. I personally think that Clinton has exaggerated her support among minority communities. Sanders’ progressive message should play well in different parts of the nation. The question is whether Sanders can win in more conservative states, where his progressive record will appeal to smaller sections of the electorate. This is why Nevada and South Carolina are important tests to his candidacy.
As for the Clinton campaign, it is time for the candidate and her staffers to take pause and think of the next steps. Her “concession” speech yesterday sounded like Sanders’ stump speech. Imitating Sanders is not a form of flattery but a sign of confusion, if not of desperation. In many ways, the problem is not the message but the messenger. If I were in her campaign headquarters, I would suggest the following.
The Clinton campaign should stop attacking Sanders’ character by trying to portray him as a regular politician. As I noted in an earlier post, his rallies, his media appearances and debate performances have helped Sanders become the consciousness of American progressivism. While it is true that he has raised serious questions about Clinton’s record and her commitment to progressive values, he has not attacked her character. This weekend’s coordinated attacks against Sanders was a sign of desperation.
Clinton needs to be more transparent. She needs to make available the transcripts of her paid lectures to Goldman Sachs and other financial firms. For better and worse, Clinton is part of the Democratic establishment. Her family is Democratic royalty and her connections to Wall Street and the corporate sector, though not necessarily problematic, raise questions about how much influence these firms have had over her past decisions. While people value her intelligence, experience and leadership abilities, voters right now are looking for somebody who is honest and trustworthy. She has accomplished a great deal of things in her life, but her record is also chuck-full contradictions.
My last recommendation would be to stop putting down people’s hopes and aspirations for the future. In 2008, Barack Obama ran a campaign that was forward-looking and promised change. As president, he was unable to translate all the promises into practices. Most registered Democrats and liberal independents believe that his heart was in the right place, but they are also hungry for change. Sanders’ campaign rightly looks to the future and it paints an America that a lot of people want to see. Clinton’s main problem is that she is defending the past and suggesting ways to build on it. She may be too loyal to her husband’s legacy or Obama’s for that matter. Maybe the fact that she was an insider in these two periods of American politics have insulated her from the American electorate. If she wants to be more authentic and connect with the electorate, she should step out of their shadows and create a path that reflects her ideals.
10 Wednesday Feb 2016
Tags
Acadia National Park, Cadillac Mountain, Galactic Core, Light trails, Maine, Milky Way, National Park, Summit
For the last year, I have been learning how to photograph the night sky. Early last year, I was in Maine visiting my in-laws and I decided to venture out in the middle night to take some images of the starry night. I was in search of the Milky Way and little did I know it was not visible at that time of the year.
I visited Grand Teton and Yellowstone National Parks in June 2015. One of my goals was to take a few photos of the Milky Way. While I had no problem finding the constellation’s galactic core, I was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Although Wyoming has some pretty dark skies, at 3:30am the Milky Way was on top of Jackson and my composition was not that great. The night was not a complete loss. I did take some nice photos of the Teton Range at night and I got some amazing shots of the sunrise.
I returned once again to Maine during the Perseid meteor shower in mid-August of 2015. By this time, I had a better idea of what I was doing. I downloaded an app that helped me track the movement of the Milky Way and I captured some pretty nice photos of its galactic core in Acadia National Park.
I am still learning how to post-process photos of the night sky. I recently acquired a Rokinon 14mm f 2.8 lens which will help me get sharper images of the stars and wider compositions that will capture the Milky Way in one frame. I am eagerly waiting for April when the Milky Way will be visible once again in my neck of the woods.
Today’s photo is an accident of sorts. I was on the summit of Cadillac Mountain in Acadia National Park to photograph the sunset and to take some photos of the Milky Way. When I got to the top of the mountain, there was virtually no wind. But once the sun set, the winds started to pick up, making long-exposure photography quite difficult. I did have a heavy tripod and few sand bags to provide more stability but those 25 miles per hour winds were slightly shaking the camera. Needless to say, I was pretty annoyed. I decided to regroup and head to another location where the wind would be less strong.
As I was driving down the mountain, I decided to pull over the side of the road to test my luck. While the wind was not as strong, my challenge was the many cars driving up down the road. These cars did ruin many shots, but this one came out OK. I think I will try to recreate this photo this summer, but I may try to use a graduated neutral density filter to balance the dark sky with the light trails made by the cars.
Camera: Canon 6D
Lens: EF 24-105mm f4 L
Focal Length: 24mm
Aperture: f 4
Shutter: 20 seconds
ISO: 6400
Post-processing: Edited in Lightroom and Perfect Effects 9.0.
09 Tuesday Feb 2016
Tags
Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, Chris Christie, Donald Trump, Establishment, Fundraising, GOP, Jeb Bush, John Kasich, Marco Rubio, New Hampshire, Primary, public opinion, Republican, Republican Party, Ted Cruz, trends, turnout
Forecasting New Hampshire’s primaries is quite difficult. The state has a semi-open primary system which allows undeclared voters, which represent around 44% of the electorate, to participate in either the Democratic or Republican primaries. Registered Republicans makeup 30% of the electorate, giving undeclared voters a chance to determine the outcome of the race.
Bill Gardner, the New Hampshire Secretary of State, predicts that more than 60% of registered voters will participate in the primaries. He also believes that participation in the Republican primary will be higher than in the Democratic one.
As seen in the table below, it is difficult to make accurate predictions about the race. A close reading of the CNN/WMUR poll shows that 31% of likely voters are undecided, while 24% are leaning towards a particular candidate. This means that less than 50% of those polled have decided who they will vote for.
ARG Tracking Poll |
CNN/WMUR |
UMass Lowell/7News |
Emerson College |
Gravis Marketing |
|
2/7 to 2/8 |
2/4 to 2/8 |
2/5 to 2/7 |
2/4 to 2/7 |
2/7 |
|
MoE 5.0 |
MoE 5.2 |
MoE 5.1 |
MoE 3.4 |
MoE 3.7 |
|
Donald Trump |
33% |
31% |
34% |
31% |
28% |
Ted Cruz |
10% |
14% |
13% |
11% |
11% |
Marco Rubio |
14% |
17% |
13% |
12% |
15% |
Jeb Bush |
9% |
7% |
10% |
16% |
14% |
John Kasich |
17% |
10% |
10% |
13% |
17% |
Chris Christie |
8% |
4% |
5% |
6% |
5% |
Ben Carson |
1% |
3% |
3% |
3% |
3% |
Carly Fiorina |
3% |
5% |
4% |
7% |
5% |
The data point to a Donald Trump victory, but it is not clear who will be coming in the much coveted second or third places. Come Wednesday morning, I expect some of the candidates to suspend their campaigns. A smaller field will make the nomination race more competitive and complicate Trump’s chances to secure the nomination in the next weeks. If anything, I think that New Hampshire will likely raise a lot of questions about the viability of the two main anti-establishment candidates – Trump and Texas Senator Ted Cruz, while providing a lifeline to the candidates in the so-called “establishment lane”.
While I think that Trump will win the primary, we need to see whether the real estate developer can win by double-digits. If he underperforms, as he did in Iowa, many people will start questioning Trump’s ability to compete in future races. In Iowa, as I noted in a past post, Trump lost registered Republicans and “very conservatives” voters to Cruz and the “somewhat conservative” vote to Florida Senator Marco Rubio. If Trump wants to secure the Republican nomination he needs to attract the support of these voting blocs. Winning the votes of independents and “moderate” voters is not a winning strategy in future Republican contests. Thus, a win in New Hampshire does not guarantee a win in the South Carolina primary or the upcoming Super Tuesday races.
As for Rubio, he came into New Hampshire as the front-runner in the “establishment lane.” But he has been the subject of concerted attacks from other “establishment” candidates and his weak performance in last Saturday’s debate has raised serious questions about his ability to take on Hillary Clinton in the general election. Rubio needs to finish no less than third place to protect his front-runner status and to convince GOP donors to finance his campaign. And with South Carolina in two weeks and Super Tuesday in three weeks, Rubio needs a massive infusion of cash to set up ground operations in all these contests.
John Kasich, Jeb Bush, and Chris Christie, after a very poor showing in Iowa, are pinning their presidential hopes to a strong showing in the New Hampshire primary. From the three, Bush is in the strongest financial position and he has made it clear that regardless of the results he will keep on fighting until South Carolina. But if the former Florida Governor is not able to finish in the top four, I expect that the GOP establishment will pressure him to suspend his campaign.
Christie is in a precarious position. He has put all his chips on the table hoping, for a strong finish. Last week the campaign had around $1 million in hand. Although financially strapped, the New Jersey governor has ran a classic New Hampshire campaign. In the last week, he has participated in more events than any other Republican candidate. His attacks on Rubio’s inexperience during the debate has helped him garner lot of media attention. But while Christie has done everything voters in New Hampshire expect of their candidates, he has not been able to get too much traction in the polls. I believe that if he does not break into the top four, he is more than likely going to suspend his campaign later this week.
Most polls have Kasich moving upwards. Multiple stories suggest that the current Ohio Governor has a very strong ground game and he has organized 23 events in the last week. And after a very strong performance in the last debate, I suspect that many undecided voters have given Kasich a second look. He has won the endorsement of the New York Times and Boston Globe and he also enjoys the support of many Republican leaders in the state. While the endorsements of these two newspapers could hurt him in other states, it speaks to his more moderate record, which is in line with New Hampshire’s “moderate to liberal” voter, which in 2012 represented 47% of the electorate.
Although Kasich seems to be the strongest governor in the race, it is not clear whether he will do well in South Carolina and in other states. Bush has recently attacked Kasich’s past support for a ban against assault weapons that could hurt him in future races. His decision to work with the Obama administration to expand Medicaid in Ohio has been the focus of another Bush attack. It will be interesting to see whether these attacks stopped Kasich’s momentum in New Hampshire.
New Hampshire is an important test for the Cruz campaign. Cruz’s natural constituency is made up of “very conservative” and white evangelical voters. As noted with Trump, the results of the Granite State’s primary will help us gauge whether Cruz can broaden his base of support. Right now he has enough money to continue his race until Super Tuesday, but a finish in second or third place will help him secure his front-runner status.
The final two candidates are Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina. Carson’s campaign in New Hampshire is non-existent. He has only held four events in the last week, and all of them were in Manchester or its surrounding communities. I expect he will come in last place and he will be out of the race sometime this week. In contrast, Fiorina has campaigned hard in the state. She has held 22 events in the last week. Her numbers have slightly improved in the last polls, but I don’t think she will get anywhere close to fourth place. I also expect Fiorina to suspend her campaign sometime this week.
To conclude, I think Trump will win the primary. I can’t predict who will finish in second, third, and fourth places. But, I strongly believe that Carson and Fiorina will be suspending their campaigns sometime this week. If Christie fails to secure a top four finis, he may also have to end his campaign. Regardless of what happens tonight, the New Hampshire primary will spoil some candidates’ presidential hopes, changing the dynamics of the Republican nomination race.