A New Shade of Granite
New Hampshire's voters are changing, and the candidates are scrambling to adapt
The transplants helped drive down already low levels of religiosity; just 24 percent of New Hampshire residents attend church regularly, a low matched only by Vermont. These new New Hampshire residents tend to be highly educated and economically elite. And they vote heavily Democratic, adding strength and numbers to homegrown concerns about healthcare, the environment, and particularly the war in Iraq, which nearly 40 percent of state Democrats listed as their top issue this spring.
The muted objections to the state legislature's approval of civil unions-the governor signed the bill last week-is one sign of the state's deepening liberalism. But the change doesn't mean New Hampshire's politics will look like the rest of New England's, experts say. Tax remains a dirty word, and the Democrat-controlled state Senate last week voted against requiring seat belt usage, leaving the state as the only one without such a law.
Nor should the wave of new residents be seen as a total loss for the GOP. Though Republicans complain about the liberal influence of Massachusetts transplants, New Hampshire's border with the Bay State is dotted with towns where conservative sentiment has been reinforced by angry middle-class refugees of "taxachusetts." The influx includes Bill Cavanaugh, who moved to Salem, N.H., after retiring from the Marines. Asked whom he expects to back in the primary, he gives an answer that would make a lifelong resident proud: "Richard Nixon. He's the only one who can't do any trouble."
For the politicians who are debating at St. Anselm College this week-the Democrats on June 3 and the Republicans on June 5-calculating how to succeed in the shifting landscape of state politics is made even harder by the growing number of independent voters, who can choose to vote in either party's primary. The volatile group has doubled in number since 1992, and their ranks are larger than either party's registered voters. In 2000, independent voters turned to the Republicans, handing Sen. John McCain a win over George W. Bush, the establishment candidate. In 2008, polling suggests nearly 70 percent will be picking among Democrats.
Leaders. For Republicans, the change lets the candidates play mainly to their base, which perhaps explains why the GOP front-runners have done little to soften their stances on the war in Iraq. McCain still has strong support from his 2000 run and has been ahead in some polls, but former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has been the leader in others. "[Romney's] very popular among people for whom making fun of Massachusetts is a hobby, because he took on some of the institutions there," says Dean Spiliotes, a politics professor at St. Anselm.
For Democratic candidates, whose primary will most likely include both party loyalists and many of those independents, the strategy seems more complicated. New York Sen. Hillary Clinton-who shows a lead in polls-is focusing on traditional Democratic voters, "working middle-class families," according to a staff member in the state. But Illinois Sen. Barack Obama scores high marks with the state's new Democrats-those with high incomes or advanced educations and those who have recently moved to New Hampshire.
As for John Edwards, whose 2004 campaign for the Democratic nomination stumbled in New Hampshire, it's full speed ahead with a populist agenda. At a town hall meeting in Keene last month, he laid out his wish list-billions of dollars for education in developing countries and universal healthcare. He even suggested mandatory public service. Not exactly "Live Free or Die." "If you're looking for careful, I'm not your guy," Edwards said to a skeptical questioner. "I'm not going to be careful. I'm going to be bold."
Bold, yes. Political suicide? Hard to say. For now, the Granite State's political character isn't etched in stone.
An interactive map on state primaries and politics is atwww.usnews.com/primarymap
advertisement
