For all the attention it gets from the candidates and the media, the New Hampshire primary, numerically speaking, is a drop in the bucket. Granted that a strong showing in the Granite State reaps huge rewards for a campaign: publicity, money, volunteers, and the aura of success. But in terms of delegates to the national conventions, New Hampshire is not worth much. At stake are 19 Democratic delegates--one-half of 1 per cent of the total--and 22 Republican delegates--slightly more than 1 per cent of the total. By comparison, Minnesota, which holds caucuses on the same day as the New Hampshire primary, contributes 75 Democratic and 34 Republican delegates.

The U.S. system of dozens of primaries and caucuses may be cumbersome, complicated, convoluted and confusing, but all the voters have to do is vote. The candidates and their strategists must devise ways to negotiate the upcoming months of democracy-in-action so as to garner the delegate totals necessary to win nomination. There are 3331 delegates to the Democratic convention and 1993 to the Republican. It isn't easy.

Campaign officials last week mapped out strategies laden with contingency plans, "what ifs" and "in the event thats." In a process in which the next move depends so much on what happened before, it is difficult, they say, to plan too far ahead. Therefore, some don't.

Rep. John B. Anderson (R-Ill.), who expects a strong third-place finish in New Hampshire and an even stronger--perhaps second-place--finish in Massachusetts, has entered only two primaries after he leaves the Commonwealth: Illinois on March 18 and Wisconsin on April 1.

"I don't think we'd be ready to fold up our little tents and go home" if Anderson does not do so well as he expects in New Hampshire and Massachustts, Bonnie Corman, Anderson's press secretary, says, adding that the Republican liberal is definitely in the race until Wisconsin. After that, "we'll have to reassess the campaign," she says.

The other Illinois congressman in the race, Rep. Phillip M. Crane, is not looking much past his home state either. The conservative will be happy if he can break into the double figures in New Hampshire--10 or 11 per cent--and remain with the pack in Massachusetts with 15 to 18 per cent, Gregory F. Cronin, Crane's Massachusetts state coordinator, says. Such expectations are not "overly optimistic," Cronin says, but admits that anything less than double figures will make it "tough to continue."

While the congressmen from Illinois may be calling it quits soon after their home state primary, most of the other candidates, at least for now, plan to be in for the duration. That does not mean, however, that they all expect to win everywhere.

Only George Bush's camp on the Republican side expresses optimism about the early northeastern contest--and guarded optimism at that. "It will be very close in New Hampshire--neck-and-neck with Reagan. That's good for us, considering where we came from," Judy Butler, assistant field director for the Bush campaign, says. "It's true we're going to have a really good showing (in New Hampshire and Massachusetts), but we don't consider ourselves the front-runner yet," she adds.

The man to beat is still Ronald Reagan, who expects a slender first-place margin in New Hampshire. "A strong second-place showing is not what we want," Jack Thompson, Reagan's campaign press secretary, says. Although he projects a Reagan win in New Hampshire, Thompson says he thinks Bush has the Massachusetts race wrapped up. "Everyone knew Bush would be strong," he says. New England is not Reagan's "strong suit," Thompson says, adding that the former California governor has "no great expectations" for the region because of his poor showing here against Gerald R. Ford in 1976.

With Reagan and Bush vying for top spot in the New Hampshire and Massachusetts races, the other Republicans can hope for little more that strong third or even fourth place finishes. But even such poor showings would not go unnoticed by the front-runners. If Crane's hopes for a double-figure finish in New Hampshire come true, Reagan could be hurt, Thompson says.

Bush's people are closely watching the floundering campaign of Sen. Howard H. Baker (R-Tenn.), who got off to a late start and for whom anything less than third place in either state could spell disaster. A poor showing by Baker would excite Bush; the former ambassador hopes to knock his main moderate challenger out of the race early, Butler says.

Although he participated in last week's debate in New Hampshire, Sen. Robert J. Dole (R-Kan.) has as much chance of winning as a VW Rabbit in the Indianapolis 500. Already Dole has all but officially removed himself from the race. John B. Connally, meanwhile, is ignoring the Northeastern primaries in favor of a "Southern strategy." "I would be surprised if he did better than fourth in New Hampshire," Joseph Malone, his Massachusetts state coordinator says.

On the Democratic side in the Northeast, strategists for Sen. Edward M. Kennedy '54 (D-Mass.) expect their man to lose New Hampshire and win his home state. Kennedy has to win Massachusetts, Rick Stearns, Kennedy's director of delegate selection, says, declining to specify by how much. Kennedy will do well in New Hampshire "only if a miracle happens," Stearns says.

But President Carter's strategists also say they are not overly optimistic about the first primary. Though Carter will probably win, he "won't do quite as well as the polls show," Martin Franks, Carter's research director, says.

The role of California Gov. Edmund G. Brown Jr. in the Democratic primaries is not all that significant, Carter's and Kennedy's workers say. Franks says Brown has drawn some liberal support away from Kennedy as a result of his strong anti-nuclear stand. Although that support may help Brown in New Hampshire, Stearns is not particularly alarmed. He notes Brown's organizational and financial problems: "Their problem is ours magnified by 20 or 30."