“When you get to the middle of the country, and that just might be my bias, but they seem very set in their ways. More traditional,” Ms. Dickinson said. “It surprised me that they’d consider him.”

In interviews with dozens of voters across the Granite State, it’s clear that Iowa is on their minds, even if they don’t like to admit that a state many are eager to disparage might influence their decision making.

The New Hampshire primary electorate tends to be a bit less ideologically liberal in Democratic races: More than 40 percent of New Hampshire voters are independent (officially called undeclared) — a significantly greater share than either party can claim — and independents are allowed to participate in either primary. With Mr. Trump facing little opposition, many are expected to flock to the more competitive Democratic primary race.

Dante J. Scala, professor of political science at the University of New Hampshire, says the idea of New Hampshire as a fiercely countervailing force is more political lore than fact, at least when it comes to Democratic primaries. In the 2000 and 2004 cycles, the state echoed the choices of Iowans, picking Al Gore and John Kerry.

One similarity: Like Iowans, New Hampshire voters decide late in the process. A month ago, polling showed that less than one-third of registered Democratic primary voters had “definitely” settled on a candidate.

The late-breaking nature of the electorate gives events in the final week before voting — like the Iowa caucuses or Friday night’s debate — significant influence to shift the race.

Michael Arnow, 66, said he had been considering Ms. Klobuchar but was leaning toward Mr. Buttigieg after seeing how well he performed amid the “craziness” of Iowa. As he waited to get into a packed town hall meeting with the former mayor on Thursday afternoon, he worried that Mr. Sanders could not defeat Mr. Trump — his main criterion for assessing the field.