Everyone knows that The New York Times is in Hillary Clinton's camp, but even the Gray Lady couldn't help but admit the obvious on Wednesday: Clinton's campaign is in shambles. While Clinton was widely expected to lose in New Hampshire, there had been some hope among backers that she might retain some key demographic groups while losing the overall vote; as The Times notes, that didn't happen:
They had hoped that women and working-class voters, who had resuscitated Mrs. Clinton’s 2008 campaign and rescued Bill Clinton’s in 1992, would at least narrow the gap with Mr. Sanders. Instead, Mr. Sanders won among nearly every demographic, including women, young voters and those who make less than $50,000 a year. In the end, the only demographic Mrs. Clinton held onto from 2008 was voters over the age of 65.
The rout rocked the Clinton campaign. As the results rolled in on Tuesday, Mrs. Clinton’s advisers took a somber assessment of the exit polls, recognizing early missteps that had allowed an insurgent challenger to gain the momentum, and their failure to capture the imaginations of young voters and young women, in particular.
As Clinton scrambled to find new messaging, her rival Bernie Sanders pulled in $5.2 million in new donations after the polls closed on Tuesday.
Several commentators including MSNBC's Willie Geiest noted that Clinton might be moving to the left to fend off Sanders. Geist said that Clinton's speech on Tuesday night made her sound like a social justice warrior.