Joe Biden Had a Bad Night in New Hampshire. His Supporters There Hope Their State Doesn’t Matter.

“It’s a marathon, not a sprint.”

Matt Rourke/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

It’s never a good sign when you’re addressing your New Hampshire supporters on primary night from South Carolina. Yet this was the position Joe Biden found himself in on Tuesday evening as his campaign sought to downplay his dismal showing in the Granite State, where he was on pace to finish 5th with a little over 8 percent of the vote. Once it had become clear that the outcome in New Hampshire would be nothing to celebrate, he and his wife Jill bailed on the campaign’s primary watch party at the Radisson Hotel in Nashua and jetted to Columbia to kick-off his South Carolina campaign.

Beaming into the Radisson’s half-full ballroom via video, Biden thanked his backers and pledged to return to New Hampshire as the Democratic nominee. He spoke for all of three minutes before vanishing from the screens positioned on either side of the stage to get back to the pressing task of salvaging his troubled campaign.

“I don’t blame him,” Biden bundler and DNC member William Owen said of the former vice president’s decision not to stick around New Hampshire. “He needs to be heading to Nevada.” Biden is headed there on Friday to campaign ahead of next week’s caucus. “Nevada’s the critical state. He has to score in Nevada.”

Owen added that he wasn’t surprised by Biden’s showing in the first-in-the-nation primary. “I kind of expected it. New Hampshire is unique. It’s basically an all white state. It’s dominated by the neighboring candidates,” he said, referring to Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Bernie Sanders of Vermont. Sanders won the New Hampshire primary, with former South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg trailing narrowly behind him. 

Former New Hampshire governor John Lynch, a top Biden surrogate, echoed Owen’s sentiments: “It’s always hard running against elected officials from neighboring states.” He said he expected Biden to perform well in South Carolina. “The whole primary process, it’s a marathon, it’s not a sprint,” Lynch added, in what seems to have quickly become the mantra of the campaign. Addressing the Radisson crowd, Valerie Biden Owens, Biden’s sister, similarly assured supporters that “right now we’re at the very beginning of a long marathon.”

But Biden now has a sizable gap to close if he hopes to regain the frontrunner status he started the campaign with. And his campaign seems destined to confront ongoing questions about whether he can go the distance against President Trump.


Our reporters fanned out to victory parties for the top three Democratic finishers for this edition of the Mother Jones Podcast, “How Bernie Sanders Won New Hampshire.” Listen:

At campaign events in New Hampshire over the past week, numerous voters said they liked and admired the former vice president, but they seemed unsure about—or outright opposed to—betting on him in a high-stakes election they view as a referendum on the fate of the country. “I respect him, he’s a great American,” said Portsmouth neurosurgeon Henry Pallatroni, who was attending a Pete Buttigieg rally in Londonderry on Sunday. But he went on: “I wouldn’t vote for him. I think he’s done. I don’t think he’s up for the job.”

Heather Webster, a New Hampshire voter who was attending an Amy Klobuchar rally in Manchester on Sunday, said she initially favored Biden in the race but had begun to reconsider. “I feel like Biden doesn’t have as much an ability to beat Trump,” she said. “I was leaning towards him until Friday—I just didn’t feel good about his debate style.” 

Biden did little to allay those concerns over the weekend. At the McIntyre-Shaheen dinner on Saturday, where thousands of local Democrats gathered to hear speeches from the candidates, Biden gave rambling and, at times, halting remarks filled with anecdotes that never seemed to land. The following day, he engaged in a bizarre back-and-forth at a campaign event in Hampton that culminated with him jokingly calling an audience-member a “lying, dog-faced pony soldier.” (Biden has said this was a line from a John Wayne movie, but even then…)

Still, vintage Biden did show up occasionally. Hours after his “pony soldier” comments went viral, he hosted an at-times emotional Q&A in Hudson, displaying his unique ability to connect with voters on a personal level. He referred to elderly audience members as “mom” and “dad,” and on two occasions offered to speak privately to attendees who asked questions following the event. (“Maybe you and I can talk afterwards.”) When one of his handlers called out “last question,” Biden spoke up: “No, we’ll take a few more.” 

This was also the Biden who showed up to a rally in Somersworth last week, where some supporters expressed relief over seeing a feisty, fired-up Biden take shots at Sanders and, for the first time, Buttigieg. And just yesterday, he moved a packed community center in Gilford, when he spoke openly about his struggles with stuttering and welcomed a 12-year-old boy with similar difficulties to share the lectern with him, kissing the boy on the head with signature Biden affection.

These are the encounters that enrapture Biden crowds. But in the end these appearances failed to squelch doubts about whether he was the right candidate to take on Trump—the paramount concern of many voters agonizing over the issue of electability. 

“I think Joe Biden on his worst day is better than Donald Trump could ever hope to be,” said Jim McGuire, a 72-year-old retired attorney from Nuangola, Pennsylvania, who had traveled to New Hampshire to assist with Biden’s get-out-the-vote effort and attended the candidate’s primary night party. 

But he acknowledged he would like to see more energy out of Biden: “I need to see more fire in the belly. I’d like to see more of that passion.”

Biden’s supporters are hopeful that he will reclaim his momentum in the upcoming contests. “I think Joe will be fine if he comes in first or second in Nevada and rights the ship in South Carolina,” Owen said.

Lynch, referring to Buttigieg’s second place finish in New Hampshire, said voters in the state “tend to gravitate toward someone new. We’re ‘live free or die.’ We’re independent. We’re contrarian.”

He added, “New Hampshire always matters. But it’s just the start of the process. Not the end.”

Additional reporting by Russ Choma. 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate