Unlike the nail bitter affair that the 2016 Iowa Caucuses turned out to be, New Hampshire, in the words of a dear friend, "This will not be the clusterf*ck that was witnessed in Iowa. New Hampshire is efficient. New Hampshire is precise. New Hampshire will provide zero confusion at the end of this evening. Elections are a religion here."
As he properly prognosticated, New Hampshire was quick to come to the conclusions that have remained at the time of my writing. Bernie Sanders took the lead by double digit margins over Hillary Clinton becoming the first Jew to ever win a primary. The Jewish part of that is just one of those side factoids that may be interesting in trivial pursuit later. Their numbers are stunning. Sanders with 60.7% and Hillary with 38.2%
On the other side of the aisle, the republican contestants were measured for their worthiness. Donald Trump too the lead with a very surprising John Kasich bringing in the second place position. At the time of this, Trump 34.6%, Kasich 16%, Cruz 11.7% Jeb! 11.3% and Rubio coming in with 10.7%. Yes there are others but they aren't worth the type.
So what does this mean?
(DNC TL:DR is that right now Bernie gets 15 of the 24 total delegates and Hillary gets 9. This makes Bernie the leader in Delegate count at this time.) http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/NH-D
(RNC TL:DR 23 delegates up for grabs, Trump wins 11, Kasich 3, Cruz 2, Bush 2, Rubio 2) http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/NH-R
I will let this article at the DailyKos explain the mechanics of the Democratic Primary Process, as it's kind of cumbersome and I would not do it any better justice than it is here. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/2/3/1479118/-New-Hampshire-Delegate-Mathematics
For the Democrats, New Hampshire has 24 DNC delegates. State party has opted for simple, 8-8-8 split between 2 congressional districts and statewide allocation.
At certain percentage levels of primary votes, various thresholds for number of delegates acquired triggers. Thereby it changes the delegate split between the candidates. The table below shows the minimum relative percentages votes required to acquire a delegate out of 8 available.
Delegate allocation is not just simply calculate percentages. The trigger points generated by the formula for fair apportionment means that there is a substantial range of vote share which results in no change in delegate allocation. Any thresholds crossed will result in an even number of delegate advantage, simply because there are even number of delegates available. The difference between delegates awarded to each candidate will be an even number.
Any vote share between 43.8% and 56.3% will result in a 4-4 delegate split. In order to get that two extra delegate advantage by crossing the threshold of support level, the larger vote share needs to be 56.3% or higher for a 5-3 split. Next stage of change in delegates (6-2split) happens at 68.8% share of votes. For the next level up (7-1split) 81.3% of votes are needed. We have to account for each of the congressional districts and statewide share of votes separately. Calculate their delegate allocations independently and then add them up.
Given the current level of polling, we can probably safely say that sanders is unlikely to grab 81.3% share of votes anywhere, District wide or statewide. So most of the battle will be for crossing those 56.3% (5-3Split) and the 68.8% (6-2split) threshold for Sanders. If Clinton can reduce the sanders vote share to below 56.3% then she still manages a tie on delegates with 4-4 split.
For example, CD1 is a bit more liberal and favorable to Sanders. Sanders is most likely to cross the 56.3% marker and achieve a 5-3 split. Congressional District 2 is slightly more favorable to Clinton, a bit more republicans (not meant to be a judgement from me). So holding sanders advantage under 56.3% is a possibility for Clinton. CD2 has Nashua and Concord main population centers which are already being visited by Clintons. Most likely also to have Clinton surrogates making heavy effort there just like they did in Polk County in IOWA. Every extra delegate matters. Where and how you decide to focus your efforts based on the trigger thresholds and a campaigns own internal polling data will be a tactical game. Clinton we seem to assume is better at this (Again, this is not a judgement. No idea why we think so, is it because we think she is a calculating, plotting, planning person?)
So even with a big boost for Sanders in places like Manchester (CD1) the overall outcome, unless there is a last minute massive groundswell that crosses the daunting 68.8% barrier giving 6-2 split, overall delegate numbers will be disappointment to some and a relief to others.
CD1 — 5-3, CD2 4-4 Statewide 5-3
Most results will be within the ranges of 4-4 or 5-3 (Sanders Advantage). There are only a handful of combinations of these in the three delegate allocation elements.
1. CD1 5-3, CD 2 5-3, State 5-3total 15-9 Sanders advantage.
2. CD1 5-3, CD2 4-4, State 5-3 total 14-10 Sanders advantage
3. CD1 5-3, CD2 4-4, State 4-4 total 13-11 Sanders advantage
4. CD1 4-4, CD2 4-4, State 4-4 total 12-12 Sanders advantage.
(Preemptive answer to what is likely to be asked: I have not included CD1 5-3, CD2 5-3, Statewide 4-4 split, because if you get enough votes for 5-3 in CD1 and CD2, then you automatically have enough for 5-3 in Statewide. Also CD2, CD1 numbers switching also results in same scenario as number 2 above)
Goal for Sanders will be to achieve an across the board 5-3 splits in each CD and also statewide. Goal for Clinton will be to drag as many as possible into 4-4 range.
If we spot any Clinton events in CD1, then we can assume that Clinton campaigns own numbers are indicating that CD1 is hovering around the threshold of 56.3% Sanders advantage and Clinton Campaign thinks it can drag that under to make a 4-4 split.
There will not be an all sweeping and grabbing of delegates by Sanders without soundly achieve 68.8% across the board and individually in each CD. That is cross the 68.8% for each congressional district without taking into account what is happening in other district. And even with that kind of revolution it gives 18-6 split. Which is pretty awesome but not death dealing and unlikely. Those thresholds will be crossed in Vermont itself I expect.
Completely clear, right? After a while it gets to be clear. But it is still messy. Not as messy as Iowa, but bad on its own.
the republican process can be found here: https://www.gop.com/the-official-guide-to-the-2016-republican-nominating-process/
Each state’s delegate allotment is set by national party rules and includes at-large delegates, congressional district delegates, and national party representatives. Apart from the states, the District of Columbia and the five territories are awarded a specified number of at-large delegates. There are three types of delegates: At-Large Delegates (AL), Congressional District Delegates (CD), and Republican National Committee Members.
- At-Large Delegates (AL) are statewide delegates who are residents of that state and are selected at large. Each state receives 10 AL delegates plus additional AL delegates based on the state’s past Republican electoral successes.
(10 delegates + bonus) - Congressional District (CD) Delegates must be residents of and selected by the congressional district they represent. Each state gets three CD delegates per district.
(3 delegates per district) - RNC Members are automatically national convention delegates and include the state’s national committeeman, national committeewoman, and state chair.
(3 delegates)
New Hampshire has 23 delegates, 14 At-Large Delegates, 6 Congressional District Delegates, and 3 Republican National Committee Members.
This was all the data I could find... I know there is more and I will come back and fill it in.