Monday’s campaign round-up

April 28, 2008

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:

* Before the Wisconsin primary in February, Hillary Clinton made debates a central point of her campaign. She appears to be following a similar strategy now, telling audiences over the weekend that she wants 90-minute, Lincoln-Douglas style debates — without moderators.

* Barack Obama, for his part, emphasizes that Dems have already broken the record for most debates ever in a presidential primary. He told Chris Wallace yesterday, “We’re not going to have debates between now and Indiana.”

* The Clinton campaign suffered a setback late on Friday when a major fundraiser switched to Obama: “NBC News has learned that a major fundraiser for Hillary Clinton, former Amb. to Chile Gabriel Guerra-Mondragon is leaving the campaign to join up Barack Obama’s campaign. Officially dubbed a “Hillraiser,” Guerra-Mondragon raised nearly $500,000 for Clinton’s campaign, according to some estimates. He has been informing people inside Clintonworld this week in what’s been described as some tough conversations. A formal announcement of a role for Guerra-Mondragon on Obama’s national finance committee will be made next week.”

* On a related note, the WaPo reported over the weekend that more than 70 top Clinton donors “wrote their first checks to Obama in March.”

* Perhaps reflecting a post-Pennsylvania bounce, Newsweek’s latest poll shows Obama’s national lead over Clinton shrinking considerably to just seven points, 48% to 41%. Both Dems lead McCain in general election match-ups by three points.

* On a related note, the Gallup Daily Tracking Poll shows Clinton and Obama tied again.

* Obama picked up another superdelegate over the weekend, earning the support of Charlene Fernandez, the newly-elected first vice chairwoman of the Arizona Democratic Party.

* Obama also picked up an extra pledged delegate during Saturday’s congressional district conventions in Iowa.

* Speaking of Iowa, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) is on the fence and planning to stay there for a while. “I am determined to stay neutral as a superdelegate until all of the people’s votes have been counted,” he said. “We set up rules. Every state signed off, so every state ought to have their say.”

* Ron Paul fans remain a very lively bunch: “Outmaneuvered by raucous Ron Paul supporters, Nevada Republican Party leaders abruptly shut down their state convention and now must resume the event to complete a list of 31 delegates to the GOP national convention. Outnumbered supporters of expected Republican presidential nominee John McCain faced off Saturday against well-organized Paul supporters. A large share of the more than 1,300 state convention delegates enabled Paul supporters to get a rule change positioning them for more national convention delegate slots than expected.”

* In a very odd column, the NYT’s Bill Kristol praised Hillary Clinton today, and parroted her campaign’s talking points.

* And in an upset, the hyper-conservative Constitution Party rejected Alan Keyes yesterday, instead giving its presidential nomination to talk-show host Chuck Baldwin. Oddly enough, despite Keyes’ notoriety, the margin wasn’t close, and Baldwin won the nomination on a 384 to 126 vote. (Baldwin was the party’s VP candidate in 2004.)

It’s ridiculous to keep watching these national polls anyway, but has anyone else noticed that Hillary is always closer in a poll released Monday, which was taken over the weekend, and farther away in a poll released at the end of the week? Anyone care to make a guess why?

Because younger voters, who tend to support Obama in greater numbers, aren’t home as much on the weekends, and the weekend polls have a greater number of older voters.

Can we go back to discussing something of substance now?

  • I see the move of Clinton’s top donors going over to the Obama campaign as an ominous sign that she is viewed by them as having lost the nomination.

    And then you’ve got Bill Kristol praising her? Goodness gracious.

  • Kristol wants Hillary as the nominee. It makes it easier to recycle attacks (and columns). Obama means having to find new lines of attack and new thoughts.

  • Ron Paul fans remain a very lively bunch

    It sounds like most of them were Romney delegates. Ouch.

  • Is anybody surprised that Bill Kristol is parroting Hillary’s talking points? She and the right have an “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” alliance that will last until, at least, August (if not all the way to November, since Hillary will want to run again in 2012).

  • Senator Clinton picked up another superdelegate this weekend, but of course you don’t mention that as you crow about (minority) Gabriel Guerra-Mondragon’s treachery. You are so busy celebrating Mr. Peace, Love and Understanding’s four-superdelegate pickup since the Pennsylvania primary that you are ignoring that Clinton has gotten two new superdelegates since Pennsylvania. Since a woman has to work twice as hard as a man to get recognition, if Hillary weren’t marginalized by her gender she’d have gotten four superdelegates, tying Senator Slimeball.

  • IMO I think those who are vilifying Wright are afraid that people might actually stop and listen to what he’s saying; of course there are those who will choose not to, but most Americans are at least moderately open minded and will understand at least in part. They will no longer view him as the same “scary black man” in the 30-second soundbites, they will view him as a man of passion, of faith, of intelligence. IOW, he won’t be as much of a liability to Obama. And that’s a good thing, especially five months before the election. Get it out in the open now.

    Thanks VRWC (and Hillary).

  • “We once looked forward with unambivalent glee to the fall of the house of Clinton. Many of us still do. But we also see the liberal media failing to give Hillary Clinton the respect she deserves. So, since we conservatives believe in giving credit where credit is due, it falls to us to praise Hillary.” — Bill Kristol

    As usual, Kristol is full of it. His latest bit of nonsense doesn’t actually give Hillary Clinton credit for all she and her co-president Bill have done that should make conservatives happy:

    – Her tacit support for the first three years of Bush’s war in Iraq
    – Her vote to allow Bush to expand his war into Iran
    – Her support for welfare “reform” and bankruptcy “reform”
    – Her support for the Defense of Bigotry Marriage Act
    – Her repeated statements that McCain is more qualified to be president than Obama

    Instead, Kristol simply regurgitates Clinton campaign talking points about the process of the campaign. His conclusion that Clinton is a better candidate than Obama, but that the liberal Democrats just don’t see it, is simply the latest proof that Kristol lives in a reality that is completely different from the one the rest of us reside in.

  • “I think those who are vilifying Wright are afraid that people might actually stop and listen to what he’s saying…”

    Hear hear,

  • In a very odd column, the NYT’s Bill Kristol praised Hillary Clinton today, and parroted her campaign’s talking points.

    Nothing too odd about it.
    He wants the Dem nomination fight to go down to the bitter end.
    What could be better than a contested convention that splits the party?
    Heck, Limbaugh is practically suing for riots…

    Couple that fact with her “totally obliterate” comment, which surely must caused a Kristol erection, and there you go…

    In the end-game, which is where we are now, one can’t tell the Clinton dead-enders from the Cheney dead-enders. They are united behind one banner: Destroy Barack at all costs.

  • Insane Fake Professor, methinks, is a refugee from the Taylor Marsh website. By the way, the women’s liberation movement began in the 70’s, and most of us rode that wave and no longer have to work “twice as hard” to be recognized. Gender has nothing to do with Barack’s 4-delegate vs. Hillary’s 2-delegate pickup.

  • no longer have to work “twice as hard” to be recognized

    Or so you thought, until the Ledbetter case and the Senate’s refusal to overturn it.
    The “movement” and the “wave” cannot be considered in the past tense, or the gains (which remain short of equality) will disappear every bit as fast as they came.

  • Impeach, IFP is satire of our own concern gooper troll, Mary.

    Enjoy his satire…then gag at the original IFP (Mary) posts.

    IFP nails her (too well sometimes – and there was no pun intended on the nails her bit, lest I get called a womanizer or some such. Hmm…I wonder if I could even BE a womanizer?)

  • Gallup poll tied, all weekend political shows talking of Hilary surge, even MD yesterday in NYT on how good she looks, she already has the popular vote, if she wins Indiana her momentum will be overwelming

  • The Clinton’s are using McCarthyism tactics as is John McCain against OBAMA Hillery worked for Goldwater. Hillery is a republican using the Democratic party to further her agenda. Not America’s agenda.Hillery will probably call on Joe Lieberman for VEEP to continue neo con control America.

  • All the talk is of the Dems divided convention, but it may be Ron Paul’s people that make the Republican Convention more of an entertaining disaster.

  • If Clinton were targeting Obama’s fundraisers, the Obamabots would be raising holy hell. When there is an announced count of former Clinton contributors now writing checks to Obama, you know this is not accidental but the result of a campaign strategy intended to counteract the faltering momentum of Obama’s campaign. It is designed to show superdelegates that Obama can steal from the Clinton campaign and thus is not the weaker, less viable candidate. Ugly and desperate.

    The hypocrisy of this amuses me. How much integrity does a fundraiser have if they switch campaigns in the middle of the primary process, taking donors with them? How much integrity does a superdelegate have if they break silence and announce for Obama when there was an agreement to let the primary process play out?

    You all seem to be unaware that this is an Obama campaign strategy in action, not a spontaneous groundswell for Obama of people just so awed by Obama that they cannot keep quiet any longer! He has been poaching Clinton’s support.

    Why is no one asking what Obama is promising these superdelegates and fundraisers in order to get them to switch? It isn’t his programs and his so-called charisma, because that has changed little since day one. It might be the desire to jump on the bandwagon of a winner, but Obama looks less like a winner with every passing day. Shouldn’t you be wondering what Obama is promising for their support? Unfortunately, we only find out what was bartered after the election when the favors are doled out.

    In any case, this shows very clearly, once again, that Obama is not a NEW kind of politician, but the same kind and a dirty one at that. Desperation isn’t pretty.

  • How much integrity does a superdelegate have if they break silence and announce for Obama when there was an agreement to let the primary process play out?

    I know! Granted, there was never any actual agreement among all superdelegates, but I think it was pretty well understood by everyone that anyone announcing between now and the convention had damn well better be announcing for Clinton. Anything else would be unfair to her. I don’t think anyone can argue with that.

    Why is no one asking what Obama is promising these superdelegates and fundraisers in order to get them to switch?

    Exactly! Free crack and gangsta rap is my guess.

  • Bill Kristol’s column is a twofer. He gets to weaken Obama by supporting Hillary and he weakens HIllary by tarring her as someone conservatives might like. This is like the Drudge stunts. Yet you all fall right in line. .

    You are beneath contempt if you would call a lifelong Democrat with solid liberal credentials, including Senate votes and activism, a “Republican” because you prefer her opponent in the primaries.

    I am not IFP, so please stop putting my name in parentheses when you refer to IFP. It will confuse newcomers to this site.

  • …she already has the popular vote… -Javier A

    No, she doesn’t. First, you have to include Florida and Michigan. Two states discount because of their violation of the rules. Second, you have to discount four and half states who did follow the rules, but happen to have caucuses, not primaries.

    Persisting in disingenuous math like that shows what a sycophant you are in addition to showing your disdain for the superdelegates. Do you really think them so stupid and naive to exclude the caucusing states as you have done?

    The depths you Clintonistas go will never cease to amaze me. That you call yourself Democrats is an embarrassment to us all.

  • I am not IFP, so please stop putting my name in parentheses when you refer to IFP. It will confuse newcomers to this site. -Mary

    Yeah, Mary’s right! Don’t tarnish the ribald satire of IFP by associating it with Mary. And MsJoanne, it’s Mary’s job to confuse newcomers with off topic comments, non-sequitor arguments, and sheer dishonesty.

  • IFP, you need to up the crazy in your posts if you’re going to try and mock Mary. In this thread, it looks like she’s trying to spoof you, and not the other way around.

    You are beneath contempt if you would call a lifelong Democrat with solid liberal credentials, including Senate votes and activism, a “Republican” because you prefer her opponent in the primaries.

    And where on the contempt chart do you find yourself, Mary, for vowing never to vote for Obama if he’s the Democratic nominee?

    Seriously, IFP, you need to catch up. Maybe you should try drinking during the day.

  • That you call yourself Democrats is an embarrassment to us all.

    Mary’s not a Democrat. If Clinton steals the nomination, she’s said she’ll vote Democratic; if not, she’ll abandon the party. That’s not a Democrat, that’s a Clinton Cultist.

    She is useful in one way — just inspired me to donate $50 more to Obama.

  • WASHINGTON – Hillary Rodham Clinton has a better chance than Barack Obama of beating Republican John McCain, according to a new Associated Press-Ipsos poll that bolsters her argument that she is more electable in the fall than her rival for the Democratic nomination. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24352818/

    If you don’t like the popular vote math, maybe you like a candidate that will win in November.

  • And the Rasmussen poll from the same dates has Obama doing better than Clinton. Whoop-dee-doo, Javier.

  • Yeah, Mary’s right! Don’t tarnish the ribald satire of IFP by associating it with Mary. And MsJoanne, it’s Mary’s job to confuse newcomers with off topic comments, non-sequitor arguments, and sheer dishonesty.

    Sorry, *I* am confused. All that sheer dishonesty…makes my little head want to explode.

    Doncha love the Rovian flavor of new math? Works for goopers and Hils supporters alike.

  • You are beneath contempt if you would call a lifelong Democrat with solid liberal credentials, including Senate votes and activism, a “Republican” because you prefer her opponent in the primaries. — Mary, @20

    Yeah, verily! There’s never been a better Democrat than old Barry Goldwater…

  • It’s pretty funny how in the spam of a month or two Republicans identified Obama as enemy #1 and flip flopped on about 15 years of foaming-at-the-mouth hatred of Hillary Clinton into being her #1 fans. Buchanan on tv, he parrots the Clinton talking points against Obama. It all fits into Rush’s “Operation Chaos” where by supporting the inevitable loser of the primary, they prolong it and make it more damaging.

    I’m surprising they so quickly abandoned their “hate-Hillary” principles! It doesn’t support me at all that Kristol signed onto Operation Chaos.

  • The GOP/right-wing isn’t even trying to hide their faux crush on Hillary. They have been preparing to run against her since the late 90s when they started using the Imagine-President-Hillary! fundraising tool.

    Actually, I’ve found it amazing that they are able to collectively swallow the vomit that must be at the back of their throats as they wildly praise her. Their restraint has been impressive. Seriously, when Pat Buchanan says Hillary is one of the most amazing candidates EVER one has to be stupid not to be suspicious.

    But the GOP/right-wing are nothing if they aren’t single-minded planners– they know if they can take out Obama that running against Hillary is all they need for their GOTV work. McCain needs Hillary so he can unite his party. Without her, they’ll actually have to work and risk looking like a bunch of racists when they attack Obama for being an angry, black man.

    I don’t think Hillary’s supporters have a clue what is in store for her if she somehow gets the nomination– after all, these are the people who for years have called her “Hitlery” and who believe that she’s a man-hating lesbian who had Vince Foster killed. Or do they not notice that the GOP/right-wing hasn’t said a bad word about her since Obama looked like a serious contender?

  • I know I’ve been falling down on the job. I’ve had a rough week and I’m off my game. Fortunately, there’s enough crazy floating around here that I will soon be rendered superfluous. I believe we’re watching the rapid progression of a degenerative mental disease with old what’s her name.

  • You are beneath contempt if you would call a lifelong Democrat with solid liberal credentials, including Senate votes and activism, a “Republican” because you prefer her opponent in the primaries.

    I don’t think you’re a Republican. I think most Republicans can at least make a show of pretending they stand for something objective besides their own compulsive need to control others and extreme self-absorption.

    What you are is a pure egoist: no principle whatsoever, including the progressive principles of care or concern for others, comes before your own desire to put a woman in the White House. You have no regard for the poor, the uninsured, the military, those whose civil rights and liberties are being trampled upon. People will die, go hungry, go without medical care, be discriminated against…all because you place your own childish temper above their well-being. As a privileged white woman of a certain economic class, you can stand a McCain presidency. Millions won’t be so lucky.

    You’re not a Republican. You’re a different kind of vile trash.

  • I know I’ve been falling down on the job. I’ve had a rough week and I’m off my game.

    Sorry, I didn’t mean that as criticism, but as disbelief that Mary was outcrazying your spoof.

  • I was referring to calling Clinton a Republican — why would I care what you call me?

    You guys are the ones who cannot address arguments about this election and therefore must make everything personal. Here is a remark addressed to new Clinton supporter here just today (I quote):

    “Are you fucking high? Or perhaps just stupid.”

    Here’s my point. Do you seriously believe that Hillary Clinton has no regard for the poor, the uninsured, the military…etc.? Her whole life says otherwise. There is a very small difference between her and Obama, yet you guys believe that she is a Republican or evil incarnate and I am vile trash for supporting her. Don’t you think that is a bit extreme?

  • Why don’t you go whole hog and tell everyone that Hillary is Osama bin Laden’s candidate of choice? It’s the same kind of smear exactly.

  • High has too much taste for that

    Javier A & Mary show up just a couple of posts apart.
    What’s up with that?
    Do you think they communicate with each other?

    “70 top Clinton donors “wrote their first checks to Obama in March.”
    Meanwhile, Hilary’s cheques are now coming from Republicans

  • You’re not a Republican. You’re a different kind of vile trash.

    I stand corrected, Maria. You’re right. Absolutely.

    Who gets more corporate money? You don’t like I said “fucking,” Mary? Too bad. The sentiment and the facts are there. You, on the other hand, are not all there. And I am not going to engage with you because you can’t understand concepts. You pick silly stuff (like fucking) instead of understanding what is being said. You pick and choose what you will respond to and you always twist what is being said so you can say whatever rubbish you so choose to twist at that moment.

    You, simply said, are a waste of anyone’s time.

  • In a very odd column, the NYT’s Bill Kristol praised Hillary Clinton today, and parroted her campaign’s talking points.

    There’s something odd about Kristol supporting one of his own???

  • I was referring to calling Clinton a Republican — why would I care what you call me?

    Gee, I dunno, Mary, you hopeless dumbass–because you spent much of the other day whining about how we all allegedly call you a Republican and this is just more of the same persecution complex? Do you share Hillary’s problem in not being able to keep your lameass stories straight?

    Why don’t you go whole hog and tell everyone that Hillary is Osama bin Laden’s candidate of choice?

    But then we’d have to listen to you carp and wail about how Obama’s team stole Hillary’s ad about him and lazy men are always stealing the work of brilliant evil female ad executives and boo hoo fucking hoo.

  • Do you seriously believe that Hillary Clinton has no regard for the poor, the uninsured, the military…etc.?

    Nope. I know that you have no regard for those people. Nothing stands between you and your obsession with getting a woman into the presidency by any means possible. Not other people’s deaths, illnesses, poverty, injury or misery. You’re that morally bankrupt.

    • Comments are closed.