Independents dominate the political landscape in New Hampshire, and they came out in droves.  Conventional wisdom would predict a strong independent turnout benefits Obama.  But there was another race on the ballot that New Hampshire independents could choose to participate in - the GOP primary.  Perhaps the polls showing Obama stretching his lead over Clinton and Romney slightly edging closer to McCain enticed more independents to cast their vote in the GOP primary.  The desire to make their votes count would steer them toward the closer race.  Why vote for Obama - whose victory, many thought, was a foregone conclusion - when you could impact a race whose outcome was much less certain.  The result was a strong victory for McCain and a stunning loss for Obama.

Another factor was the Hillary breakdown.  She cried.  Whether staged or not, it turned out to be a brilliant ploy that tore away the abrasively inpenetrable persona she has been trying to get away from all this time.  One emotional moment did what 14 months of careful strategizing and image spinning could not do - it made her appear human.  And it captured the hearts of Democrats, especially women.  Proof can be seen in the fact that roughly 20 percent of voters said they made up their minds in the last 2 days before the primaries, and the strong majority voted for Clinton.

Those two factors contributed more than any other to the surprise result in my view.  So what are the implications?  What do the races look like in the aftermath?  One thing is clear on both sides - we do not have a front-runner in either race.  Obama has yet to benefit from the large African-American populations who live in southern and industrial states.  Yet, Hillary's political machine and on-the-ground organization are second to none.  Either could win the nomination, and, at this point, neither would be a surprise.

On the GOP side, McCain's victory further weakens Romney's anemic chances.  The pundits on television last night pointed to New Hampshire and Michigan, which holds its primary next week, as a do-or-die double-header for McCain and Romney.  They posited that if either one wins both, the other is finished.  As you know if you read me over the last two weeks, I predicted Romney was finished even before Iowa.  I have not changed that position and will not even if he wins next week in Michigan.

What I didn't hear last night about Michigan is what it will mean if Mike Huckabee wins there.  After a good third place finish in New Hampshire, his momentum from Iowa is virtually intact.  And he has polled even with the others in Michigan.  I believe he has a chance to win.  Here's a news break for you.  I'm prepared, should Huckabee win Michigan, to issue an edict that he will be the GOP nominee.  First place in Michigan will undoubtedly lead to a massive victory in South Carolina and another, closer, victory in Florida.  The momentum generated before Feb. 5 would then be too much too overcome.

It was an historic victory for the new "comeback kid."  It was a harsh rebuke to a popular governor from a neighboring state.  New Hampshire likes to be known as a state that bucks the trends.  They certainly demonstrated that once again last night.

Update:  I've gotten a couple of email responses to this post from New Hampshire folks.  One gentleman wrote in to agree with my assertions, stating...

Your analysis of the Independent vote in NH is right on.  My wife was trying to decide between Obama and Guiliani, and finally voted for Guiliani since "Obama doesn't need my help".  My dad was similar, although he voted for McCain.  If you asked either of them on Sunday who they were going to vote for, they would have said Obama.

Of course, this does not prove in itself that my assertions are correct.  In fact, Coleman Kane writes in with a much different take.  He attended several rallies, at least one each featuring Obama, Hillary, and Bill (Clinton).  He says the Obama events were nothing more than pep rallies filled with vague cries of "change" and "hope."  By contrast, at the Clintons' rallies, Bill and Hillary spoke of specific issues and specific ways to make them better.  Of course, I'm sure the rhetoric was nothing resembling the kind of change I would support, but the arguments resonated with issue-driven Democratic electorate in the Granite State.  He continued.

All of this policy detail and planning was absent from the Obama speeches, and he really sounded all too familiarly like the Bush 2000 campaign stressing himself as a "Washington Outsider" who will "Reach across the aisles" and "End partisan politics in Washington" all through "Change" and "Hope".  The "change", "hope", and the rallying cries get the youth energized, but the older people were really interested in knowing specifics about plans.

Looking at the turnout demographics, Coleman's point appears to be well-taken.  While Hillary did win the female vote by a wide margin, we also saw voters from older and less affluent areas turn out big for Hillary and overwhelm the youth and yuppie vote which favored Obama.