YOUR COMMENTS

Yes, New Hampshire is different from Iowa and the rest of the county - the big difference being that independents are allowed to vote in the N.H., primary while they are unable to participate in the caucuses in Iowa or vote in primaries in most other states. Independents voters are very anti-Bush and want CHANGE and that is why Obama is moving up in N.H., - and Clinton is just more of the status quo.

And tha national polls are worthless. Clinton will lead all national polls all the way up to the Iowa caucuses and N.H., primary due to her name recognition. National polls are unable to reflect nuances in each individual state. Watch individual state polls and ignore the nationla polls if you really want to understand what is going on.
- Robert Dailey, Pasadena

One question for ARG president Dick Bennett: if Sen. Obama's advance in your New Hampshire poll results is explained by your assertion that Sen. Obama prevailed in the dust-up with Sen. Clinton last week, how do you account for the fact that your very own Iowa poll covering the same time period shows Sen. Clinton coming from behind to move nine points in front of Sen. Edwards and to increase her lead to fifteen points over Sen. Obama? Or that both the NBC/WSJ and Rasmussen Reports national polls both show Sen. Clinton increasing her lead over Sen. Obama to twenty-one points during this same time period? Is New Hampshire really that different from everywhere else? Or might there be a reliability issue with your poll?
- Joe, Washington, DC