Of course, the Democratic National Committee would have you think otherwise.

For decades, Democratic power brokers have tried to brand New Hampshire as too White, too rural and too homogeneous to deserve to have the first presidential primary.

That turns out not to be true.

Using 22 different metrics, WalletHub concluded New Hampshire was 83% similar to the national average, very closely aligned on issues ranging from gender, age and political party makeup to poverty, education and unemployment.

The two outliers are race — the rub for the DNC — and religion.

New Hampshire’s Black population is 1% of the total, compared to 12% nationally, and 89% of the population is White, compared to 59% nationwide.

Nearly three-quarters of Granite Staters (73%) do not identify with a specific religion. Nationally, that figure is slightly more than half (54%).

WalletHub’s report included some academics who carried the DNC’s talking points.

“In moving New Hampshire to being the second in the primary season after South Carolina and very close (on the same day) to Nevada, the Democratic Party is recognizing the more diverse coalition that it represents with South Carolina and Nevada having higher proportions of voters of color,” said Shana Kushner Gadarian, a professor and associate dean for research at Syracuse University.

Biden’s primary plans

To no one’s surprise, President Joe Biden won’t hang around the Oval Office on Tuesday while massive numbers of voters go to the polls in New Hampshire and cast ballots without his name on them.

Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris and their spouses will attend a rally in northern Virginia, the day after the 51st anniversary of the landmark Roe v. Wade decision on abortion rights.

Dems consider Virginia an ideal location since voters there flipped that state’s House of Delegates and kept its state Senate blue in 2023.

On Monday night, Harris will be in Wisconsin, another battleground state the Democrats need this November.

While former President Donald Trump has claimed credit for overturning Roe v. Wade by putting three anti-abortion justices on the Supreme Court, he has been elusive on the subject during this race.

Trump repeatedly has resisted offering an opinion on a federal ban on abortion except to criticize as “too extreme” a six-week ban signed into law by Florida Gov. and presidential rival Ron DeSantis last year.

Dems report NH pro-abortion rights

Right on cue, the Democratic Governors Association reported Friday that its polling found that 67% of New Hampshire residents support legal abortions in “most cases” and 64% would “prefer a candidate for governor who supports protecting abortion rights,” compared to “a governor who wants to restrict abortion rights.”

“This new polling confirms what we’ve known all along: Granite Staters are tired of politicians attacking and undermining their reproductive rights, and are ready to reject any candidate that attempts to do so,” said New Hampshire Democratic Chairman Ray Buckley.

“Granite Staters value their freedom, and have been crystal clear about where they stand on this issue, and it’s not with Chuck Morse or Kelly Ayotte.”

The DGA claimed more than half of voters said they were less likely to vote for either Republican once they were told about their records on abortion in the U.S. Senate and state Senate.

The poll didn’t ask voters if they support the current law that bans abortion after 24 weeks unless the mother’s health is at risk or the fetus has a life-threatening anomaly.

Ayotte has said that, if elected, she would seek no further restrictions on abortion.

Morse has not proposed any more changes to state abortion laws thus far in this campaign.

“It is shameful that this out-of-state Democrat group is misleading voters when Kelly has repeatedly said she supports and will not change New Hampshire’s current law which protects a woman’s freedom to obtain an abortion for any reason up until 6-months of their pregnancy,” said John Corbett, Ayotte’s campaign spokesman.

Ayotte on immigration

As immigration rises up in the issue grid among presidential primary voters, Ayotte keeps going there, criticizing her Democratic rivals especially former Manchester Mayor Joyce Craig for supporting sanctuary city policies.

Ayotte seized on a case in Boston last week in which a Massachusetts judge released an illegal immigrant charged with rape of a disabled victim rather than honor an immigration detainer.

“This is what happens in your communities when you become a sanctuary state — the same policies that Joyce Craig and Cinde Warmington would bring to New Hampshire. Don’t MASS it up!” Ayotte posted on X.

Both Democratic hopefuls went on record against GOP legislation at the State House in 2023 that would have banned cities and towns from adopting sanctuary city policies.

Craig did not address that bill while commenting on the Bay State case.

“This rapist should have never been released from custody following his arrest for a heinous and violent crime. The release of violent offenders that pose a threat to communities is unacceptable. Nothing is more important than the safety of our residents. That is why I have been a strong advocate for fixes to New Hampshire’s flawed bail system,” Craig said.

Both Democrats said anti-sanctuary city laws would harm cooperation between local law enforcement agencies and federal authorities.

Ceasefire write-in push

Former Executive Councilor and 2020 Democratic candidate for governor Andru Volinsky led an effort last week encouraging Democratic Party voters to write in “ceasefire” on their presidential ballots as a call to stop the violence in Palestine and the Middle East.

“Vote Ceasefire aims to get N.H. voters to voice their anger and pain at the polls. Politicians listen to votes, and the people want a ceasefire,” the group declared at a virtual press conference.

This effort did not win any fans from the bipartisan members of the USA-Israel Relations Caucus in the New Hampshire House of Representatives.

Reps. Jim Spillane, R-Deerfield, and Anita Burroughs, D-Bartlett, condemned what they called “divisive and inappropriate tactics.”

“We don’t believe there is anyone with a beating heart who does not want to protect the innocent victims of Gaza. It is heartbreaking to see what is happening to an entire population, 47% of whom are children,” the caucus said in its statement.

“However, hijacking the ballot to direct foreign policy is a dangerous, inappropriate, and slippery slope.”

NH primary: straight to video

Secretary of State David Scanlan unveiled a new video last week advising “new Americans” how easy it is to register and vote in New Hampshire.

“Voting is your voice in our Democracy,” Scanlan said.

The late filmmaker John Grfoerer produced the 26-minute tutorial with Concord TV.

Affidavit ballots debut

This is the first statewide election to be held under a new law requiring an affidavit from everyone who registers to vote Tuesday and doesn’t have valid identification.

In 2022, the Republican-led Legislature passed and Gov. Chris Sununu signed a measure that throws out the votes of anyone who doesn’t return a self-addressed letter to the Secretary of State with proof of their identity.

During Manchester’s citywide election in November, opponents seized on a lack of voting privacy when small numbers of people are at the polling place.

The law bans election officials from identifying anyone who requested a ballot or how that person voted.

As New Hampshire Public Radio first reported, only one voter cast such a ballot in Manchester Ward 5.

After that person failed to send back proof of an ID, one vote was deducted from Democratic mayoral candidate Kevin Cavanaugh and Aldermanic Chairman Joe Kelly Levasseur, a Republican.

Teaching ban back in court

A lawsuit over the state law that bans the teaching of so-called “divine concepts” faced a key hearing in U.S. District Court last week.

The American Civil Liberties Union and National Education Association of New Hampshire asked a judge to issue a summary judgment that this law, which was tacked onto the state budget in 2021, is unconstitutionally vague and should be set aside.

The NEA and ACLU insist the law already has had a chilling effect on teachers’ selection of books and other instructional materials, because they fear being found in violation of the law, which could jeopardize their license to teach.

State prosecutors insist the law was carefully crafted to ensure that controversial topics such as slavery and gender identity may be taught in school as long as it is not suggested that there is an inherent bias in American society.

A judge last year declined the state’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit, finding it made a “plausible claim” on vagueness that should be allowed to go forward.

Towns could see casino money

Senate President Jeb Bradley, R-Wolfeboro, and Senate Ways and Means Committee Chairman Tim Lang, R-Sanbornton, have proposed to give cities and towns that host charity casinos some property tax relief.

They offered an amendment last week to an account wagering bill (SB 432) that would require all operators to give the host community profits from 10 charity gambling dates a year.

As written, the host towns would get the same 35% net profit that charities get when casinos sponsor gambling dates for them.

“Property taxpayers should not be shouldering the cost impacts of charity gaming facilities, and this amendment ensures that doesn’t happen by providing revenues for property tax relief,” the pair said in a statement.

During a hearing, the New Hampshire Center for Non-Profits came out against the bill, noting those 10 dates would come out of revenue that charities would receive.

Many charity casinos already have waiting lists of charities that are unable to get gambling dates each year.

Primary bill sails in Senate

As expected, the state Senate unanimously approved asking voters this November whether they want to amend the Constitution to enshrine the protection for New Hampshire’s presidential primary (CACR 22).

This was the easy part.

The measure now heads to the House, which flatly rejected the idea last spring.

The House Election Laws Committee unanimously recommended killing the bill, contending that the primary protection in state law was good enough and this didn’t rise to the level of a constitutional right, such as freedom of speech or the right to bear firearms.