Here is a good analysis of what has been happening to the electorate here in New Hampshire over the last few years.

New Hampshire really has changed in many ways. Demographers like Peter Francese note that of its 1.3 million people almost 500,000 have arrived in the last two decades. And, according to a recent study by the University of New Hampshire's Carsey Institute, 207,000 people moved in and 188,000 left between 2001 and 2005, a period that coincides with the post-9/11 awakening of the progressive wing of the Democratic party. The Institute estimates that 23.5 percent of the people voting on January 8 will be first-time New Hampshire voters.

Not all these newcomers are politically identical. Andrew Smith, the director of UNH's Survey Center, maintains, for example, that many of the Massachusetts expatriates in the southern tier who fled high taxes and housing prices are now the most Republican-leaning voters in the state, which still has no income tax.

But there are two other groups that are well represented at the unceasing daytime town meetings and campaign events during primary season. The first are affluent and highly educated retirees from other northeastern states, drawn to New Hampshire by its pastoral environs and low costs. They have the time, money, and interest to listen to candidates unveil their proposals in person, instead of watching them on C-SPAN. Fergus Cullen, the chairman of New Hampshire's Republican party, concedes that these voters "tend to be not that good for Republicans"--though he takes solace in the fact that the state is still far more Independent (44 percent) and Republican (30 percent) than it is Democratic (26 percent).

Read the whole thing.

The one caveat I would add to the analysis is that, one the state level, if the Democrats ever try to use their legislative majority and hold on the governor's office to put through an income tax they can kiss their majorities goodbye. While many of the Massachusetts refugees (and New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, etc.) and retirees are socially very liberal, and some are on the far left on issues of foreign policy, most will vote their economic interests like everyone else. That means, in the privacy of the voting booth, they will react badly to anything which makes their cost of living go up, especially if it resembles the nonsense that drove them from their states of origin.

Here is John Distaso's analysis of the campaign as we head down the home stretch, from Thursday's New Hampshire Union Leader.

Meanwhile, the FEC, which should be overseeing the campaign, is on hold as there are no longer enough commissioners to hold a quorum. The FEC bureaucracy will continue to function, but no major decisions and rulings are possible until the problem is resolved. As a consistent foe of so-called campaign finance reform, I don't think this development is necessarily a bad thing.