The New Hampshire Advantage

Although it’s months before the primary elections, any casual, New Hampshire, political observer can predict with absolute certainty which party’s candidates each newspaper will endorse. Like the lead articles in most local papers and TV stations, our “hard news” is gilded with opinions. On the East Coast the practice is as common as salt water and as predictable as ocean tides.

The New Hampshire advantage—beyond no sales or state income taxes—is that we get to see the presidential candidates on our turf. That’s an advantage. It clears the media fog. We are not confined to sound bites and the agenda driven interpretations of our newspapers, local pundits, and national TV newscasters.

But that’s only part of it. News bites focus on the podium. Generally, the people behind the speaker are enthusiastic supporters, props that applaud and smile in sync. The reaction of the audience, and how quickly they disperse after the speech, is the true measure of a candidate’s acceptance. It’s too bad the TV media outlets don’t focus on the audience and keep the candidate in a little picture-in-picture.

Watching and reading the media’s synopsis of these political events is fascinating, especially the national newscasts. The summaries aren’t summaries—they’re scripted boilerplate. In fairness to the national broadcasters, maybe their reporters sleep through the events.

NASCAR fans should be thankful these journalists don’t cover their sport, because they would only hear about the accidents. After attending a few of these political events and comparing them to the post-analysis in the evening news, one gets the feeling these journalists would throw nails on a speedway track.

And cameras miss a lot. The candidates’ speaking abilities vary widely. The messages of the less skilled are compromised by their lackluster performances. The cameras objectively report this tangible shortcoming. But the cameras miss the connection between the speaker and the audience.

It’s not a cerebral connection; it’s something they radiate. Maybe it’s sincerity, maybe it’s passion, maybe it’s honesty. I’m not sure. But certainly, it’s the one thing their speech writers can’t give them and the cameras rarely detect.

Now that the other states are jamming their primaries together, fewer voters will get the opportunity to personally relate, almost one on one, with any candidate. That’s a shame because no one can take the measure of a candidate through a lens.

There is another insight that the attendees of “neighborhood” rallies receive. We get to observe the candidates when the flood lights aren’t burning. Some ignore us. Some only huddle with their inner circle. Some smile and shake hands with the same sincerity as a used car salesperson. Some don’t remember what state they are in. Some arrive late without apology. Some won’t loiter for even a second after the cameras stop recording. But some, just a few, sincerely reach out to us.

Campaigns are money dominated. The candidates with the fattest bankrolls always seem to be in the top tiers. This would change if more voters met them in person. No amount of image advertising or media spin can overcome the perceptions gained during their personal appearances. Character, intensity, beliefs, trustworthiness, and distain for the masses quickly materialize. It restores your faith in the process.

I wish every voter in this great Republic would get the opportunity that blesses our tiny state of New Hampshire. We don’t have to rely on a tainted media to make our decisions.

Live free or die.