Monday’s campaign round-up

March 3, 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:

* Who’s likely to win in Ohio tomorrow is anybody’s guess, but Quinnipiac has Clinton leading Obama by four, 49% to 45%. Quinnipiac showed Clinton up by 11 a week ago. Zogby, meanwhile, has the results of a daily tracking poll out this morning, and it shows Obama with a narrow edge over Clinton, 47% to 45%. (Zogby’s track record this cycle has, however, been less than sterling.) Public Policy Polling (D), meanwhile, shows Clinton increasing her lead, which PPP says now stands at nine points. Rasmussen shows her up by six.

* This could be interesting: “Florida Governor Charlie Crist said he’d support a repeat of the Democratic presidential primary so the state’s delegates can be counted at the party’s national convention. Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said he’s open to the possibility. Primary elections are paid for by a state’s taxpayers, so the offer from Crist, a Republican, is ‘very helpful’ because money is an issue, Dean said. ‘We’re very willing to listen to the people of Florida,’ Dean said on CNN’s ‘Late Edition’ program today.”

* More kitchen-sink time: “Another ad hitting Obama hard on national security, which sort of makes you wonder why — if this is so potent — they’re only doing it now. The ad says that as chairman of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Europe, he didn’t hold any hearings on NATO oversight (which isn’t an obvious task of that subcommittee, but could probably be wedged in). ‘He was too busy running for president to hold even one hearing,’ the ad says.” She’s on the attack over NAFTA, too.

* New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said yesterday, “I just think that D-Day is Tuesday. We have to have a positive campaign after Tuesday. Whoever has the most delegates after Tuesday, a clear lead, should be, in my judgment, the nominee.” The problem, however, is that no matter what happens tomorrow, Obama will have the lead among delegates.

* Mark Penn, Clinton’s chief strategist and pollster, is distancing himself from his campaign responsibilities. Penn told the LAT over the weekend that he had “no direct authority in the campaign,” describing himself as merely “an outside message advisor with no campaign staff reporting to me.”

* Yesterday, the Dallas Morning News, a generally conservative paper, endorsed Mike Huckabee and Barack Obama for Texas’ primaries. On the Democrat, the Morning News wrote, “In sharp contrast to Mrs. Clinton’s antics mocking his optimism, Mr. Obama has shown that it is possible to have both hope and intellectual heft. Her campaign has confused proximity to power with work experience, selectively taking credit for her husband’s accomplishments.”

* In Ohio, the Cincinnati Enquirer also endorsed Obama.

* Clinton’s “3 a.m.” ad has launched a thousand parodies, but as always, there’s only one Lee Stranahan.

* On a conference call yesterday, Obama aide Susan Rice, a former Clinton State Department official, pushed back aggressively against Clinton’s claims on international experience: “[Rice’s] strong points where when she pointed out that Clinton’s claims of experience often seem overblown. Rice referenced the fact that Clinton’s surrogates couldn’t site any examples of her crisis-management experience, said that Clinton ‘claims to have negotiated opening the border of Macedonia, but that opening preceded the opening of that visit by a day,’ and said that Clinton’s ‘claimed to have played a crucial independent role in the Northern Ireland negotiations, but George Mitchell said she was ‘not involved directly.'”

* On Friday afternoon, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, endorsed Obama. Overall, within the Senate Dem caucus, Clinton now leads Obama in total endorsements, 13 to 12.

* On Saturday, Clinton made a surprise guest appearance on “Saturday Night Live”: “Probably her best line (and well-delivered to boot) came when Amy Poehler, the comedienne who portrays Mrs. Clinton on ‘SNL,’ asked the candidate how things were going. ‘Oh the campaign is going very, very well,’ Mrs. Clinton said in a syrupy tone. Then, with mock suspicion, she continued: ‘Why, what have you heard?'”

* And Ralph Nader’s latest running mate, Matt Gonzales, said in 2004 he didn’t want Nader to run for president anymore. “I’m not that enthusiastic about his campaign primarily because I think we’ve already been there a couple of times,” Gonzales said, referring to Nader’s bids as the Green candidate in 1996 and 2000. “I would like to see somebody else run.” Nader, of course, is now in the midst of his fourth campaign.

Her campaign has confused proximity to power with work experience, selectively taking credit for her husband’s accomplishments.

Indeed.

  • a repeat of the florida democratic primary? wonder how that would turn out…….

  • I really hope they do a primary in Florida. That would show Florida the rules are nothing “personal” and that we very much want their voice to be heard, they just have to not jump ahead like freaking dickheads. In fact I think the DNC should offer to pay for it. Dean sounds kind of niggardly in his quote.

  • “describing himself as merely “an outside message advisor with no campaign staff reporting to me.”

    That’s what 10 million bucks gets you?

  • So Mark Penn is now deserting the HMS Hillary that he, himself, did more to sink than any other single individual on the planet. Not surprising that he’s turned out to be as yellow as he is incompetent. And throwing the rest of the team under the bus, to boot! What a classy guy.

  • On Friday afternoon, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, endorsed Obama.

    Oh THAT endorsement makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Blech.

  • Jay Rockefeller, now there is a supporter that Obama should “reject and denounce.”

    Who wants the support of the bastard trying to sell us all out to Bush and AT&T?

  • Tamalak –

    In fact I think the DNC should offer to pay for it.

    That would destroy the lesson to other state legislatures. As things stand now, if Florida puts out the money for a second primary election other state legislatures will think twice about moving their primary schedules around in ways that they’ve been told will receive sanctions from either the Dems or the GOP. The lesson of Florida will come up every time a legislature wants to move their primary schedule around and the “damage” will have real dollars attached to it – NOTHING makes a state legislator take notice of what you’re telling him like showing him that what he’s proposing could cost the state millions of dollars in taxpayer money. Especially if the reason that he’s arguing FOR it is because it’ll make the state more money.

    If the DNC puts out money for the special election then the lesson is lost and this whole thing will be fought all over again in the next election. You may not agree that the DNC should be able to wield such power over state legislatures, and that’s a fair argument to make. But Dean’s job is to be the single most partisan Dem in the country right now, and so it’s his job to smack the state legislatures around and make them listen to the party when it comes to these things.

  • I just heard an interesting thing about the polls that I didn’t know and maybe you don’t either: most polls, if not all, base their samples on registered (ie. likely) voters. That sounds like a built-in bias toward older people who identify as Democrats, ie. a significant part of Clinton’s base. Maybe the reason Obama was underestimated (especially at the beginning) is that he’s bringing out enormous numbers of new voters, who aren’t necessarily being reflected in the polls. New Hampshire, of course, belied that, but I think that state ‘s primary was an anomaly, a surge in women and older voters based on the execrable Hillary-bashing on cable TV that peaked just before it.

  • If Obama wins Texas (the most complicated state primary) then it will show me that his oratory is supported by his organization abilities.

  • I just heard an interesting thing about the polls that I didn’t know and maybe you don’t either: most polls, if not all, base their samples on registered (ie. likely) voters. That sounds like a built-in bias toward older people who identify as Democrats, ie. a significant part of Clinton’s base.

    It’s a significant bias towards people in a certain demographic, yes. Mainly people who have voted before or who belong to a cohort of people who tend to vote. So yes, the models may not be as robust where Obama is concerned because his big strength is to pull in people for whom 2008 is their first election ever or who have never bothered voting before. That could be one explanation for the shift in expectations vs. reality.

    New Hampshire, of course, belied that, but I think that state ’s primary was an anomaly, a surge in women and older voters based on the execrable Hillary-bashing on cable TV that peaked just before it.

    Actually, New Hampshire voted pretty much exactly like New Hampshire always votes – different from Iowa. Clinton had a big lead in New Hampshire polling and ended up with more votes – that’s not surprising at all. I really think the “talking heads bashing Hillary all week” thing was far less of an impact than many folks want to have it be. It’s too pat – it’s too narrative. It’s the type of thing that TV pundits love: a simple explanation for a complicated question.

    It seems much more likely that Clinton won New Hampshire because she invested a LOT of time, effort, money and people into winning New Hampshire. She knew it was a “must win” state for her early on, and gave her a “firewall” in case Edwards won Iowa – and Edwards looked like he could be a real threat in Iowa early on when the ground game would have been in the planning stages. New Hampshire was one of the few places where Clinton’s campaign did “good work” and I think attributing her win there to “Hillary bashing” by the TV pundits commits the same fallacy that the pundits themselves commit – rushing to the pat, narrative answer when the real, more complex answer is just too boring to be true.

  • Seriously, the media is fawning over John Dickerson for asking Clinton whether she has had a 3 a.m. moment, but it’s only just now being discussed that her whole Macedonia negotiations claim is patently false and that the Northern Ireland negotiations were primarily handled by one of the U.S.’s top negotiators. There are plenty of former state department officials who would love to set the record straight. Are you telling me that no major news outlet could find them?

  • Unless one candidate drops out after the official primary season is over, in the interest of fairness primaries that count should be held in Florida and Michigan. Given the fund-raising successes of the candidates and the DNC, couldn’t all three split the cost of running them? I for one would be willing to contribute or make an additional contribition to the campaigns and the DNC.

  • Does anyone else see the invisible hand of the RNC in Charlie Crist’s offer?

    As most polls are indicating, Hillary is a much better candidate for McCain to run against. If Obama wins FL, nothing changes, except exhausting resources. If Hillary ties in Texas and wins Ohio, she has a reason to stay in the race if Florida is back on the table. McCain and his supporters would welcome anything at all that would push the Dem nomination to the Convention; increasing the lilkelihood of a fractured party and causing Obama to blow through is war chest.

    Just sayin’

  • Mark Penn, Clinton’s chief strategist and pollster, is distancing himself from his campaign responsibilities. Penn told the LAT over the weekend that he had “no direct authority in the campaign,” describing himself as merely “an outside message advisor with no campaign staff reporting to me.”

    Shorter: “Hey, I’m just the piano player here – I have no idea what all those folks do when they go upstairs.”

    “Her campaign has confused proximity to power with work experience, selectively taking credit for her husband’s accomplishments.”

    For being such a “feminist,” Hillary is far more accurately a demonstration of the “traditional path to power” for a woman: marrying the right man.

  • Mark Penn “short:”

    Nicht Clintonista.

    NICHT CLINTONISTA!!!

    Poor Mr. Penn. His multi-million dollar paycheck from Fortress Hillary, Inc. must’ve bounced again. Note from Hillary to Penn: I’M PAYING YOU WHAT YOU’RE WORTH, DAMMIT! WORTHLESS PAPER!!!

  • So the Dallas Morning News says
    [Hillary Clinton’s] campaign has confused proximity to power with work experience, selectively taking credit for her husband’s accomplishments.

    I think the real attention grabber is that the Dallas Morning News now admits that Bill Clinton’s presidency had accomplishments.

  • Primary elections are paid for by a state’s taxpayers, so the offer from Crist, a Republican, is ‘very helpful’ because money is an issue, Dean said. ‘We’re very willing to listen to the people of Florida,’ Dean said…

    Well-played Crist! Not of course because he gives a fug about the Democrat primary per se. But because of these two hardball reasons:

    1) It will help keep the Clinton campaign firing off republican talking points against Barack well into Spring. That’s a net republican gain.

    2) If I am a McCain republican, I would want to run against Clinton. Obviously she will lose every independent voter between Canada and Mexico. Opening the Florida door makes it possible that she could yet win the Dem nomination.

    You’ve got to hand it to the republicans.
    They sure now how to take every advantage and leverage it to the max.
    This play is even better because the state of Florida, instead of the republican party, has to pay for it. Cool. Nicely done!
    Kudos @ Crist.

  • Clinton issues campaign criticisms of Obama and you label it “More Kitchen Sink Time”. Way to be unbiased.

    If Obama cannot win Texas and Ohio by huge margins, I think it is clear that he must exit the campaign. If he cannot convince large population centers with Hispanic and working-class people to vote for him, how will he be able to win in November? It will be his duty to bow out gracefully so that this negativity is not prolonged.

  • Obama wins the most states, the most elected delegates and the most votes nationwide, but Mary thinks he should bow out if he doesn’t win two specific states “by a huge margin”.

    Screw democracy! Right Mary?

  • “If Hillary ties in Texas and wins Ohio, she has a reason to stay in the race if Florida is back on the table.”

    Hillary can’t win unless she wins 70 of the votes in every remaining primary/caucus state.

    Of course, she can’t do that. Therefore, she can’t win. Period.

  • Mary at 21 gives a great example of moving the goalposts – when in fact her candidate should be the one to drop out on Wednesday if she hasn’t won by at least 65% to 35% in Ohio AND Texas. And even if she does, she will still have fewer pledged candidates, so is is premature and best – and arrogant anyway – to suggest that Obama should be the one to drop out.

    Obama was not my first choice, but he has earned my respect with his ability to come from behind over and over and bring more and more voters along with him. I am more enthusiastic about his campaign at this point than I have been for any presidential candidate since 1972. I will still vote for Clinton in November if she pulls this off (easy to say now since i don’t think she will) but I don’t see myself enthusiastically campaigning for her.

  • If Obama cannot win Texas and Ohio by huge margins, I think it is clear that he must exit the campaign. If he cannot convince large population centers with Hispanic and working-class people to vote for him, how will he be able to win in November? It will be his duty to bow out gracefully so that this negativity is not prolonged.

    Is this satire?
    That said, I’ve got a bad feeling about tomorrow.

  • Clinton issues campaign criticisms of Obama and you label it “More Kitchen Sink Time”. -Mary

    It was actually a Clinton aide who used the term ‘kitchen sink’ in relation to the Clinton campaign’s plan leading up to desperation Tuesday. Those who look for bias, find it.

  • NATO oversight….

    Is there a reason this is vital?
    Last I checked just about everything else needs oversight more than a military alliance whose members we hardly talk to lately.

  • #15, #19, your analysis of Crist’s motive for offering to have Florida pay for another Democratic primary sounds exactly right to me. I hope Dean is as smart as #15 & #19 to recognize what’s going on.

  • Well, i’m with Bill Richardson on this. Unless Sen Clinton is playing Democratic straw man to play out all the attacks that the Republicans will use against Sen Obama, i can only see the continuation of this “race” (the quotes are meant to suggest the way Zeno would see this race) as being a slow strangulation of the Democratic Party and its chances in November.

    • Comments are closed.