Historically a First Step to the White House

When Bill Clinton lost the 1992 New Hampshire Primary, historical precedent said his presidential hopes were dashed. No candidate had ever lost the first primary in the nation and been elected president.

Still, Clinton had shown uncommon resiliency. He had already weathered the Gennifer Flowers adultery scandal and allegations of dodging the Vietnam draft. Expected to lose by double digits, Clinton pointed to his eight-point loss as proof he was the "comeback kid." As primaries moved to the south, he regained momentum and seized the nomination in a strong Super Tuesday showing.

The Clinton victory set a new precedent in a changing political primary environment. In years past, New Hampshire -- as well as other early states -- had dominated the nominating season. Candidates used their wins in New Hampshire and Iowa as a springboard to larger contests, such as California, New York and Super Tuesday. Most importantly, a win in New Hampshire could spark a new wave of additional money.

In 2000, however, many states have moved their primary dates earlier, hoping to have more of a say in the nominating process. Republicans, in particular, have a busy campaign schedule. The Delaware primary is only seven days after New Hampshire, and the Hawaii caucuses are also during that week. They are followed by South Carolina (2/19), Arizona (2/22), Michigan (2/22), Nevada (2/23), North Dakota (2/29), Virginia (2/29), and Washington (2/29) all in February. Just a week later, eleven other states -- including California, New York, and Massachusetts -- hold their primaries on March 7.

Because of this front-loaded schedule, political analysts say candidates will have to raise the majority of their campaign funds prior to this year's New Hampshire primary. In other words, the "springboard" effect from New Hampshire might need to come from pre-election rising poll numbers, as well as a victory, to generate enough money and support to go the distance. Nationally, Vice President Al Gore and Texas Governor George W. Bush easily lead their parties' races.

"If every state holds its present position," wrote the Concord (NH) Monitor in a June 1999 editorial, "the primary process will be settled in just five weeks, starting after Christmas and ending before the sap runs: Iowa in Week One, New Hampshire in Week Two, California and almost everybody else in Week Five."

The Democrats will also be busy. But after New Hampshire and Delaware, they have five weeks off, allowing for more fundraising along with campaigning in the delegate-rich March 7 primary states. Political scientists are speculating that the typical New Hampshire boost might be more likely for a Democrat than a Republican, as the Democrat can use the extra time to prepare for March 7.

"If [Democratic candidate] Bill Bradley can manage to win in New Hampshire that gives him at least five weeks to consolidate his advantage," author and scholar William Mayer told the Washington Post in December. "[Republican] John McCain doesn't have that gap."

Although winning the primary has been historically critical to winning the presidency, several insurgent candidates have done well in New Hampshire, after indicating weaknesses within their own parties. In 1996, Patrick Buchanan, former Nixon speech writer turned Reform Party candidate, beat long-time Kansas Senator Robert Dole by a percentage point on the Republican side. In 1984, Democratic Colorado Senator Gary Hart easily defeated former Vice President Walter Mondale.

But for the most part, a win in New Hampshire has signaled a strong campaign. Former California Governor Ronald Reagan won comfortably in 1980. Former Georgia Governor Jimmy Carter campaigned tirelessly in 1976 to win by six points. Richard Nixon earned a landslide victory in the 1972 primary.