New Hampshire: Still Purple?

By Jim on November 5th, 2008

James Pindell makes a pretty good argument that NH is still more of a purple state than a deep blue one.

And yet New Hampshire is still a divided state politically.
Much of the electoral success for Democrats in 2006 and 2008 is due to two unpopular Republicans: Craig Benson and George W. Bush. Benson set the bar so low that Lynch was able to walk in get the benefit of the doubt. To his credit he has sustained that popularity, but he did so in an environment where not a single Republican credibly challenged him since September 2005 when Senate President Tom Eaton was deposed. There is no doubt that Bush’s unpopularity is the number one reason that Paul Hodes and Carol Shea-Porter won in 2006 and a big reason they were able to keep the seat this year.

Neither will have any fading influence in 2010.

Despite last night, I tend to agree with him. The independents rule the roost in New Hampshire and it will be interesting to see how they react to what the next state legislature does especially if it involves broad based taxes.

If the Democrats go that route I suspect they will pay heavily in the next election cycle as there seems to be no indication that any majority of voters want broad based taxes in New Hampshire.

Note that it looks like the Dems will still control the Executive Council and the State Senate exactly as before. I have seen no reports about the NH House so I have no idea if any seats changed hands.

Edit: The Monitor is exulting in “NH’s leftward momentum.” Ugh. There is this tidbit though from that article:

Still uncertain at press time: whether the Democrats would hold on to their control of the New Hampshire House. One notable House result: Longtime Republican Rep. Jim MacKay, the former mayor of Concord, lost his seat.

I have no idea why it’s taking so long for the results for the House to be reported on. I didn’t think the pubbies had much of a chance of taking it back anyway.