Tuesday’s campaign round-up

Today’s installment of campaign-related news items that wouldn’t generate a post of their own, but may be of interest to political observers:

* Barack Obama’s speech in Philadelphia on race just wrapped up, and I’ll have a report shortly. Here’s the prepared text, which was similar, but not identical, to the delivered speech.

* Interesting development after Hillary Clinton’s speech on Iraq policy yesterday: “Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is sticking to her plan to withdraw troops from Iraq, no matter what. In a testy exchange with a reporter on a conference call Monday, after Clinton delivered a speech about Iraq, top Clinton advisors went to pains to make plain that there would be no room for adjustment in Clinton’s Iraq plans, no matter what happens on the ground. At one point her communications director boiled it down to a one-word answer. Would she stand by her plan? Yes.”

* Good: “A coalition of liberal groups will coordinate $350 million worth of efforts to mobilize voters and advocate for candidates for the general election, its leaders are expected to announce Tuesday. They are billing it as the largest such effort ever across the liberal spectrum. MoveOn.org, labor groups like the A.F.L.-C.I.O. and Change to Win, and other organizations like Acorn, Women’s Voices Women Vote and the National Council of La Raza will be taking part in the effort for the presidential election and House and Senate races.”

* The Clinton campaign asked the Texas Democratic Party to delay their district conventions, the second step in the caucus process. Yesterday, the state party rejected the request (and even seemed to mock the campaign for asking).

* Lots of new polls out over the last 24 hours. CNN has Obama and Clinton leading McCain nationally by similar margins, Gallup’s tracking poll shows Clinton edging Obama by two among Dems nationally, and CNN shows Obama besting Clinton by seven among Dems nationally.

* A new Quinnipiac poll shows Clinton leading Obama in Pennsylvania by 12, 53% to 41%. CNN noted, “Clinton’s widest gains in the state are among white voters, who now back her over Obama by a margin of 28 points. That compares to a 19-point gap in the late February poll.”

* Bill Clinton re-entered the fray over controversial remarks he made in January. “What happened there is a total myth and a mugging,” Clinton told CNN. He said that Charlie Rangel has argued that the Clinton campaign didn’t play the race card, but “that had some played against us.”

* Americans United for Change released a very clever video yesterday showing Bush and McCain talking about the economy with literally the exact same words and phrases.

* McCain’s war cabinet is hardly encouraging.

* We’ve long been under the impression that the first Democratic candidate to reach 2,025 delegates get the nomination. But as CNN noted, the so-called “magic number,” is “a constantly moving target.”

I read Obama’s speech and it brought tears to my eyes. I do hope to see that speech coming from his lips in full on all the stations that have been railing this issue.

I hope to see the America he envisions in my lifetime.

  • …top Clinton advisors went to pains to make plain that there would be no room for adjustment in Clinton’s Iraq plans, no matter what happens on the ground. At one point her communications director boiled it down to a one-word answer. Would she stand by her plan? Yes.”

    A shockingly dumb corner to paint oneself into…

    To not give oneself wiggle room (i.e. no matter what happens on the ground) is akin to handing McCain a samurai sword and offering up one’s neck.

    Good thing she won’t be the Dem. nominee.

  • I can’t think of a speech I’ve seen which was so moving. Kennedy’s (both John and Robert) were powerful and stentorian, the kind of speech you dreamed of doing in elocution contests or something. Bill Clinton’s were too much “I feel your pain” for me. This one was like someone you know well and respect talking to you at length from just across the room. Calm, knowing, caring, trusting. It was simple, no grand phrases or clipable moments. It addressed everybody and somehow managed to lift everyone beyond the petty divisions we’re all so used to. Somehow very 21st century. Nearly everyone who called in to Air America had obviously been crying. On top of it all he managed to squeeze in references to what should still be the real issues of this campaign. It’ll take a while to assess in detail, but there’s no doubt it was great.

    I don’t think the speech worked well for Hillary. Maybe she should consider delivering a similar one covering the history of the evils which spew from our equally pervasive sexism, but I don’t believe she could pull it off with even half his effect.

    If ever anyone, since FDR himself, qualified for the giver of “fireside chats”, it’s Obama. Yes. He. Can.

  • Dammit! Now I’m confused again. Last week I asked whether Florida or Michigan would increase the number of delegates needed to win if we included their votes, and was assured that it did not. Now that CNN link tells me this:

    As of today, 4,047 delegates will vote for the nominee, according to the Democratic National Committee. That means that a candidate needs 2,024 delegate votes to win. These numbers do not include Florida and Michigan, which will be adjusted if the states hold races in compliance with DNC rules.

    So does the number of delegates needed go up if we include them or not? Because if the number of delegates needed goes up if we include them, then there really isn’t much point in including them, as it doesn’t solve our main problem. Sure, there’s also the issue of pissing those voters off, but that was the problem we had from the start. But if including them just moves the goalposts back that much further, I fail to see why we’re bothering with them. Is there a definitive answer to this?

  • Good thing she won’t be the Dem. nominee.

    Agreed, but how can any democrat successfully run against 4 MORE YEARS of dur chimpfurher’s legacy and PERPETUAL WAR in iraq?

    Our “decide” has an approval rating of 20 percent (and has for months) and somehow the dems are going to overcome this commanding support and defeat a candidate that stands for everything the smirking chimp stands for?

    How can any articulate candidate defeat another brain-damaged figurehead of the criminal cabal that brought use darth cheney and dur chimpfuhrer?

    Doesn’t mclame already have this thing “in the bag”?

  • He said that Charlie Rangel has argued that the Clinton campaign didn’t play the race card…

    Charlie Rangel…said in unequivocal terms in South Carolina that no one in our campaign played any race card…”

    Rangel is hardly an unimpeachable source since he’s admittedly involved in the campaign.

    This is akin to saying “I’m right because I said so.”

  • Ed

    You live in lala land drinking the koolaid.

    Hes toast he can’t win the general now.

  • Ed: You live in lala land drinking the koolaid.

    Isn’t that The Koolaid Drinker Calling The Kettle Black? (Or some such hooey.)

    I agree Ed, every time Obama is called upon to deliver an important speech, he damn well hits it out of the park. It’ll be great to have a president who can orate again, instead of The Great Obfuscator.

  • A new Quinnipiac poll shows Clinton leading Obama in Pennsylvania by 12…

    Surprising. Most polls that I saw, as little as a week ago, had Clinton leading Obama in Pennsylvania by 19 or 20 percentage points.

  • Most polls that I saw, as little as a week ago, had Clinton leading Obama in Pennsylvania by 19 or 20 percentage points.

    Me too.

    But for the Clinton Cultists, this is good news, see, because they live on Bizarro World.

  • Anyone who listened to his speech, and many others, who does not think this man should be president of the USA should go live in another country … that mean you Comback Bill …….

    And anyone who ‘believes’ in these corporate polls, as in CNN , pretending that it is a dead heat between McStain and either Obama or Clinton also need to go live in another country………… if you believe that then you ‘believe’ that half the country wants four more years of Shit stain Bush ………

  • surprising. Most polls that I saw, as little as a week ago, had Clinton leading Obama in Pennsylvania by 19 or 20 percentage points.

    Oh—you noticed that little gem as well? The funniest part of it is that Quinnipiac is peddling this shrinking lead as a “gain.”

  • At another site less than an hour ago, the Clinton-supporters response to Obama’s speech was ably summed up by a single poster:

    “Way to throw your grandmother under the bus, Obama.”

    Seriously, these people need help. I can’t believe that Clinton herself actually likes to be represented by these trolls.

  • I can’t believe that Clinton herself actually likes to be represented by these trolls.

    One might conceivable suggest that “trolls of a feather, flock together….”

  • I’m from Michigan, and I feel that if the Democrats (the Obama supporters) do not want my vote in the primaries, then I may never give it to them again in the general election. I have never in my life voted Republican before. People seem to fail to realize that it is extremely highly unlikely that Obama can win the general election without carrying Florida. Think back to Al Gore. I think it is time the Democrats quit playing games and start courting the Michigan and Florida voters, rather than telling us they don’t want our votes, because both states look like Clinton territory. I think this has more potential to destroy the Democratic party than anything else going on in the election so far.

  • Marilyn, please spare us the melodrama. It isn’t the fault of either candidate that your state decided to break the party rules by moving up your primary, nor is it their fault that your own state’s rules are getting in the way of a re-vote. And this election is not moving in the same way as the 2000 campaign. The Democratic party is using Dean’s 50-state strategy, not the 2000 “16 states and a hat-trick” strategy Gore tried. The dem won’t necessarily need Florida this time.

    If you’re shallow enough to blame the dem nominee, whoever it may be, for your state’s rule breaking, then you’re free to put the country’s blood on your hands by effectively supporting 4 more years of Bush. But I would hope you’re mature enough not to do such a terrible thing for so childish a reason.

  • Marilyn, i’m from Michigan too…and you’re being disingenuous to the extreme. If you’re going to be pissy, you should be pissy with the Gov, Debbie Dingell, and Mark Brewer. (i know i am)

    They assumed that they could pull this silly little stunt; Clinton would wrap up the nomination after Super Tuesday; and then she’d be gracious and make a speech about every vote counting. The DNC would buckle, mostly because it wouldn’t matter. And they could all start measuring drapes.

    Just over 330,000 people voted for Clinton (out of more than 7 million registered voters in the state); christ, Romney got more votes than she did.

    And redoing that primary would be almost impossible. What about all the people who were told that their voice didn’t count…by the Gov no less…so they voted in the Republican primary? What about the MDP’s rule that write-ins would be thrown away?

    Lay the blame where it belongs: on the MDP. And if you vote Brewer for MSU regent, you get whatever you deserve…that man is a supreme jackass.

    Finally, as my grandfather is fond of saying, “Who ever told you that life was fair?”

  • My question is: Would Hillary be afforded as much latitude if her spiritual advisor were a racist? If her reverend were a member of the KKK would she be able to stand up in front of the world and say we have a horrible past and I am going to lead our country to a better place? Not likely, she would be out of the race hands down! It amazes me that Obama didn’t disassociate himself from the reverend even after he knew about the comments. Surely there are more qualified African American people, that represent the best of America, who would be suitable to sit on his spiritual advisor committee. The choice is up to us America……… do we pick the candidate whose spiritual advisor wants God to Dam America?

  • Comments are closed.