Hillary Clinton Hillary Clinton Hillary Clinton Hillary Clinton Hillary Clinton

Who’s On First?

Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton:

…the debate seemed structured to further the storyline that the media has developed in the last few weeks, a storyline that only political junkies know much about or have any interest in: A Hillary has been spotted off the port bow. Attack!

Let me quantify my impressions. In the first two segments, I counted thirty-three questions. Twenty-two of them were designed to facilitate either another candidate attacking Hillary Clinton, or Clinton responding to attacks (either from another candidate or from Russert). Indeed, all of the major subjects were structured around attacks on Clinton.

Segment 1: How do Clinton, Edwards, and Obama Differ?
Segment 2: What Shall We Do About Iran? This segment could have been geared toward a more substantive policy discussion to tease out differences between the seven candidates. However, Russert and Williams framed the questions around Kyl-Lieberman, thus encouraging the six Democrats who opposed the resolution to go after Clinton, who supported it.
Segment 3: What Is Clinton’s Real Position on Iraq?
Segment 4: What are Clinton’s Qualifications?
Segment 5: Is Clinton Credible on Social Security?


Afterwards, I could only stomach so much post-debate “analysis.” Before I had to walk away from the TV to find the Tums, I watched in amazement as Chris Matthews interviewed Joe Biden and Chris Dodd – and talked about nothing more than Hillary Clinton (well – I suppose there were a few UFO-related questions in there).


123 thoughts on “Hillary Clinton Hillary Clinton Hillary Clinton Hillary Clinton Hillary Clinton

  1. Thanks for the link. I was curious about the ratings, too, because I know MSNBC lags behind Fox and CNN anyway. The blogger makes an interesting point about what the debate organizers were trying to do.

  2. It was disgusting. The debate was a coordinated attack on Hillary, all the time. If I was Hillary I would have blown my top, but she is a cool customer. MSNBC should be ashamed for this fiasco.

  3. Admin, over at taylormarsh.com, she has a guy on the ground who reports from Iowa. He’s reporting that the tag team effort is helping derail Hillary and promoting Obama and Edwards. What do you think is going on there?

  4. UGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Last night, I came home from work, took a nap, and my partner did NOT wake me up for the DEBATE!!! However, reading about what happened, I am not sorry I missed it.

    I have read everything I need to know. As expected, it was a pile-on. Hillary predicted this on HILLARYHUB before the debate even started.

    I am thoroughly convinced HILLARY is playing chess while the others are playing checkers. Honestly, she knew exactly what these men were goigng to do to her, and she let them. What was she thinking?

    1. I suspect the NARRATIVE of “Hillary ATTACKED” is going to be all that is remembered this debate. The other candidates may be giddy today. They finally “won” (in their minds) a debate. But as they continue their attacks on HILLARY, people will just remember the simple narrative “Oh they ALWAYS just attack her.”

    2. I also suspect that the moderators, as well as the other candidates, were pushing her so hard, that they thought they would get to her, and end up with a “DEAN SCREAM.” They didnt. She walked away unscathed, not succumbing to the pressure and not attacking other Democrats.

    3. Now that the other canidates have had a small success in their “ATTACK DOG ROLE” I suspect that they will continue to use this for the rest of the nomnation cycle. Meaning that when voters go to the polls, they will remember THAT NICE HILLARY, who has offered good plans for the MIDDLE CLASS and HEALTHCARE, and that MEAN OBAMA and EDWARDS, who offer nothing but scathing attacks on that NICE WOMAN.

    4. This will prevent HILLARY SUPPORTERS like myself, from getting complacent in the final days of the campaign. Its one thing to support HILLARY. But I have to admit that there Hillary supporters like me who think “OH WELL, HILLARY will win no matter what I do, so there is no need in going the extra mile.” These attacks, personal in nature, will most assuredly mobilize people like me.
    Thats just my take on the whole thing. I have complete confidence that HILLARY knows what she is doing, and her “standing there and taking it” last night was no accident.

  5. Dick Morris is already saying now that Hillary has a great chance of being the nominee:

    What if the current polls in Iowa are the final result? What if Romney wins in Iowa and then comes in first again in New Hampshire? What if Giuliani stumbles badly in Iowa and finishes fourth? What if Huckabee surges and finishes second in Iowa? What if Fred Thompson makes an unimpressive third-place finish there?

    And, on the Democratic side, what if Hillary only narrowly beats Obama in the first caucus state?

    With two months to go before the Iowa caucus, everything can change, and probably will, but it is worth speculating on what the impact will be if things don’t change much from now until then.

    On the Republican side, a Romney victory in Iowa would virtually guarantee a win in New Hampshire. The two states, in media terms, are practically one. Two-thirds of New Hampshire lives in the southern part of the state that watches Boston television every night. Since Romney served as governor in Massachusetts, he will probably win New Hampshire anyway. A win in Iowa would make it a fait accompli.

    Two victories would make Romney the front-runner for the Republican nomination. Coupled with a Giuliani stumble in Iowa, it could totally change the dynamic of the Republican primary. Here’s what might happen:

    Rudy could come to be seen as too antagonistic to the Christian right, and moderates might once again turn to McCain as the less inflammatory option, sidetracking the former New York mayor.

    Huckabee, coming in a strong second, could take off and become the poor man’s Romney, taking advantage of his greater consistency on social issues, his Christian (read: non-Mormon) beliefs, and his support of the Fair Tax as an alternative to the IRS.

    Republicans would likely panic about the idea of a Mormon candidate and worry about his prospects, making Huckabee and either Rudy or McCain viable as alternatives.

    Thompson will be forced out, having lost his position as the socially conservative answer to Rudy.

    And on the Democratic side, Edwards, who had been leading in Iowa until recently, would probably have to leave the race. That would coalesce the entire ABH vote (Anybody But Hillary) around Obama, giving him a leg up in the national race.

    Hillary’s vulnerability, newly revealed in the Iowa vote, could create a sense that she might not be electable given her baggage and lead Democratic voters to look seriously at Obama. The result could be a real slugfest between the two candidates, making a mockery of the idea that her nomination is inevitable.

    And the outcome? Hillary probably still wins. The history of Democratic primaries has always been that challengers emerge and run stronger than anyone believed they would but then fade and the front-runner prevails after all (see Bradley in 2000, Tsongas after New Hampshire and Brown after Connecticut in 1992, Gore after the Southern primaries in 1988, Hart in 1984 and Kennedy in 1980).

    And among the Republicans? Who knows? The race would be thrown into chaos. Anyone could win. Romney would have the momentum, but doubts about his ability to win as a Mormon would make his lead unstable. Huckabee would be gaining, but he may not be well enough known to make it. Giuliani could still recover, given his strong national standing, but would be hobbled. And McCain would still have his immigration position hanging over his head, but as Rudy falters, he might pick up the slack.

    Then again, Hillary could open up a large lead in Iowa as her juggernaut gets going. And Rudy could, at least, finish a strong second to Romney in Iowa, and perhaps beat him, making it a Giuliani-Romney runoff in the main primaries, which Rudy probably wins. Then the general election match-up would be Hillary vs. Rudy, as we have all anticipated.

    But what if?

  6. mj,

    all Iowa based reporters/blogs/media want to get attention so they all make up stories about how tight the race is or how quickly a big winner can fall, or how quickly a loser can rise, or how losers will lose or winners will win, etc. It’s all about self promotion.

    What is going on in Iowa is organization of all the campaigns. Also Hillary is hiring 100 additional staffers in Iowa which will give her the biggest staff in the state. This big staff will now be able to handle the full campaign that will develop in November and December for the vote on January 3.

    AFSCME will now coordinate with the great and expanded Hillary staff and begin their rollout. AFSCME will be in Iowa full force in November. AFSCME has a lot to prove so they will pour coordinated massive efforts into Iowa (compare this to SEIU for edwards which has to coordinate with out of state SEIU locals and has a small Iowa local).

    Here is Yepsen on the importance of AFSCME

    It’s also good news for her in Iowa because in an Democratic family fight, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees endorsement is the single most sought-after nod in the state.

    The union has over 16,000 members and represents 40,000 workers in Iowa. Add in the spouses, partners and other relatives and you’ve got thousands of votes who’ll be influenced by this decision.

    In what’s expected to be a close caucus fight with John Edwards and Barack Obama, AFSCMEs endorsement could be what tips Iowa’s caucuses for Clinton.

    But AFSCME hasn’t had the greatest track record lately. [snip]

    And it’s precisely because of those defeats with Dean and Blouin that the union support may really mean something to Clinton this time.

    AFSCMEs clout on the line. It can’t afford another embarrassment in Iowa. As a result, it will be pulling out all stops, pouring in money and workers and everything it can think of to help Clinton.

  7. Admin, thanks for posting that. I was worried about what mj said, although I know the polls aren’t showing that. mj, Was the reporter talking about debate fallout, or just the general trend of them attacking her?

  8. Undecided Democratic voters usually don’t like seeing candidates beat each other up. I understand why Russert did what he did, but I’m not sure there is a scenario where either Obama or Edwards can benefit from their behavior last night. Maybe they could win a few voters from each other but from my experience, they were most likely to lose with undecided voters.

    It was very weird evening. We all knew it was coming, and Hillary proved herself the champ. Seven to one and she’s still standing.

  9. hi folks,

    Pew just published a new poll, the story is on politico’s frontpage. Clinton will cream Rudy by 51 by 43! This poll is very important since the sample size is extremely large, and the internals are very very encouraging for Clinton.

    She wins the South.

    She polls evenly with voters who attend church at least once a week.

    She splits families with a household income above $100,000.

    She loses rural voters and men — but only by a narrow margin.

    All are constituencies Republicans have dominated for decades; George W. Bush won each by double-digit margins.

    In primary fight, the race remains static since September, Clinton in solid lead of 45 to 24…

  10. Thanks admin for the update on Iowa and Kostner forthe Pew poll. It’s all good. Keep your eyes on the big prize and forget the pile-up is the message to me. The video was brilliant and was just the ticket to give perspective. It was excruciating to watch, particularly since she had to be careful not to put any of the football team on the defensive. She could’ve cheerfully eviscerated them on several key occasions, but she kept her cool and that was so important. When she did engage, it was with chris dodd and it was just watching her truly “debate” with him that was actually a break for me. She stood firm. But she couldn’t do what we all wanted her to do because her task was to watch her own responses and watch their responses to her and balance not just what to say but how to say it. That’s a tall order. Especially with Russert and Edwards competing for que es mas macho (sorry about the bad spanish…does anybody remember that for saturday night live)? She’s got the best team than any democrat in recent history. I’ve volunteered to go out of state to help if needed and I am sure that there are many others who are doing the same. It’s gonna be fun dancin’ at the inauguration. You think we can all meet? LOL mollyj

  11. NBC News’ roudup of yeseterday’s debate.

    It’s actually a bit more balanced than I thought. The basic theme was that the debate was a ‘pile-on’. They also interviewed a local Iowa political analyst, she actually said this sort of attacks may actually help her.

  12. hi everybody,

    After i calm down and think through this, I agree we have to set our sight on the prize, not to be distracted by the noise in the echo chamber.

    I think the danger is the tendency to get distracted by Edwards’ sleazy attack. It can get emotional and has the potential to get dragged into a stupid fight with him.

    Edwards has no chance in hell, our primary focus should always be on Obama.

  13. Kostner, I wouldn’t be surprised if it did help her. She was cool, collected and smart under fire. What better words for a future president? The guys on the other hand looked like a bad championship wrestling team. mollyj

  14. Y’all is Russert a journalist? I’m thinkin’ he’s one of those entertainment news guys. mollyj

  15. Have none of the male candidates for the Democratic nomination heard the phrase “divide and conquer”? Sen. Clinton’s likely opponents in the GOP (all of whom trail her in national polls) must have been rejoicing last night. When she takes a reasoned, nuanced position on a given issue that may have multiple angles and grey areas she is accused of obfuscation and disingenuous triangulation. Had her Democratic rivals said “she’s a liar, a cheat, an embezzler, a murderer and she hates puppy dogs” they could not have done more damage to their party’s cause.

    If a Republican is elected President in ’08 he will look back on Oct.30th, 2007 as a watershed moment in the national race. He will have the self-serving vitriol of the “gentlemen” Democratic candidates in the MSNBC debate to thank for some of his success. They have risked sacrificing the good of the country and their party for a momentary and quicksilver boost in their own waning fortunes. One hopes we don’t wind up feeling similarly about them as we did towards Ralph Nader in 2000.

  16. i watched that debate this morning and it was agonizing to watch. the other dems, russert, and the idiots attacked and attacked.

  17. torrondt,

    this whole things aged me…LOL


    so whats the plan? do you know?
    all the stations are talking about how they now have her aquiles heel, the immigration issue…

    why cant she just say ‘immigration is different for each state, they all have different needs, and it should be the states right to decide what is the best way to handle their own answers to the issue, until we come up with something on the federal level that works, i certainly wouldnt want to tell govenors how to best manage their business.’…

    could she say that?

  18. BTW, My dad watched some of the debate. He’s a Dem who will vote for whoever gets the nomination, but he never gets on the Internet or read blogs. He told me all the negativity turned him off.

    Has anyone else heard similar input from family, friends or co-workers who aren’t political junkies?

  19. BTW, did Hillary clarify her position at all today on that immigration question? If she didn’t, I guess that means her campaign isn’t worried about any fallout.

  20. Paula as far as the immigration business goes, there is no there there. There is no issue. Edwards and Obama have come out for issuing the licenses. Only Dodd is against the idea and his supporters are not happy with Dodd about his position. Obama and Edwards will try and exploit what they can about this, but how? The odd man out is Dodd.

    Earlier tonight Matthews said he was not going to let this issue go. He said the 9/11 hijackers had 60 licenses in their wallets. Matthews later interviewed Axelrod and seemed unhappy when Axelrod told him that Obama was for issuing the licenses. Matthews then let the issue go.

  21. paula, the illegal alien driver’s license thing. not sure it will hurt her in the primaries. may in the general.

  22. terrondt, I imagine she’ll do what she has to blunt that. I’m certain the GOP will use immigration as an issue against whoever our nominee is. They always find at least one wedge issue.

  23. Mark Halperin was on the ‘Lehrer News Hour’, discussing the debate, and he made an ass out of himself as usual. He claims that Hillary was “damaged” by her opponents last night, and that “the dynamics for the political class of this race dramatically changed in that debate”.

    No surprise, he claimed “I thought Barack Obama had some very strong moments, particularly on the excerpt you showed talking about the archives. And I thought John Edwards had his strongest performance to date.”

    These clowns get it wrong time after time, yet they bring them back on as if they have some actual incite.

  24. Immigration is a complicated issue that doesn’t translate well to the lightening round of any forum and definately not one held at the end of a two hour long mud slingin’ gotcha marathon. Immigration is further complicated by the fact that states are in such different situations. This makes the issue even more contextual than usual and the last thing folks are concerned about in gotcha politics is context. In fact, in an election campaign, context for a candidates positions is the first thing to go.

  25. This is pathetic. The archives. I thought that was a real low point for Obama. Why the hell should the public see papers between a husband in wife? It was typical rightwing bs.

  26. folks,

    I think Clinton campaign needs to do more work on her surrogates. She has plenty of influential establishment backers. Why can’t they speak out and jab at the character flaws of Obama and Edwards? This should be a much smarter strategy.

  27. msnbc has not held one fo these idoitic debates with a grain of decency to me-except the one olbermann did. hillary should not go to another msnbc debate if she can help it. 2 hrs of the moderator trying to savage you is in violation of the rules the candidates signed on to. the cnn one in 2 wks i think may be more even. the voters deserve a even handed debate-not russert and the candidates brinig out the billy clubs. im emailing msnbc about this travesty. i also wonder why on earth have a 2 hr debate-its very exhuastive, viewers tune out after a while etc.. it would sevre hillary well to respond mroe directly when attacked. she did some yesterday-but we are reaching the point where more may be needed. u know like” i thought barack and dodd would agree with me on the iran resolution as both of them sponsored legislation a few months ago targeting iran.” her opponnents still got away with way too much-like edwards saying hillary will keep us in iraq forever and have some troops remain to go after alqueda. um if u go to edwads irq plan he too wants some troops to stay there and go after la queda as well. but he got away with it. then again all of this may be hot air-how many really watch a 2 hour attack hillary fest on cable? i bet not many.

  28. What the heck does Halperin mean by this?

    “The dynamics for the political class of this race dramatically changed in that debate.”

  29. If Clinton doesn’t get in her sparring, and that’s all it is, she won’t be battle-tough for the real, no-holds-barred tussle that will be the general election campaign. The hottest exchange the democrats will have intramurally will look like patty-cake compared to the stuff in the general, so, in a way, it’s actually GOOD that this is happening now. Let’s say Hillary, “runs the table”, and has the nomination locked-up after Tsunami Tuesday, she’ll go a long time between the victory and the convention, without ANY chances to hone her debating skills. With Obama truly “the reluctant warrior”, not to mention vague and meandering, it’s Edwards who will be the best, “sparring partner”, for Hillary until the general and he may be the best that she faces, PERIOD. The more she faces the heat, the cooler and more self-assured she’ll be later. The more times she has to stand down 2 or 3 or more attackers, the easier it will be to handle one.
    So, don’t fret about the coming attacks and debates. If Hillary is as good as I think she is, she not only knows she needs the toughening, she WELCOMES it, because she wants to be the best, strongest candidate she can be. She did fine this time out, especially considering the circumstances. She’ll build on this and be even better next time.

  30. Realist:

    I don’t think she was stunned by the attacks from the fellow candidates at all. She swatted them all well. It was Timmy with all the dirt digging and gotcha questions that annoyed her at the end.

  31. Kostner, I wouldn’t worry. I’m hearing/reading lot’s of rumblings that this will back fire with women. Problem is most of the talking heads are elitist guys who like seeing these guy bash Hillary. I know this back fired big time for me. I just do not respect Dodd, Edwards and Obama after they called her unelectable(as if they are) on national tv. It was a disgrace.

  32. on one of the stations they were saying its best for barack and edwards to not do any personal attacks that were personal, they said barack and richards would have others who will do that for them, in a swiftboat style campaign that was like the one done on kerry, which they said will be very effective.

    so if they are planning that for hillary, why cant our side do that to them? we have a lot of bitchy old witches like myself, who know start a rumor if we have to.

    we should be turning up the heat cause you know what the other side is like, they will try to take hillary down if they see an opening…

  33. I think that is the best anyone possibly can do when they relentlessly attacked her. Now, I think there are 2 issues here. Number one – Yes, she did not make any serious mistakes. But, with this debate there is one theme which the democratic opponents will take with them. Hillary doesn’t answer specifics and is non-commital & doesn’t answer questions. Now, this is the single point they will use to attack her over and over with.

    As Kostner says she needs to bring establishment out in full force who rip these attack dogs. One thing is that press and msm has largely negative story about Hillary in the debate saying this was not a good night for her. Well – what can you expect when the entire debate it designed for a character assassination!!

    But, it is time to shed any complacency and work very hard. The focus always has to be Obama – he is the only one who has the resources to go far. Edwards has no chance whatsoever.

  34. united 12, a Swift Boat-style attack won’t work on her because she’ll fight back, unlike Kerry. There’s no comparison.

  35. I’m not surprised that’s the MSM narrative. That’s what they were hoping for anyway. They’re tired of her big lead; they want a horserace.

  36. there is a poll on democracyforamerica — that’s a website with a .com — you all might want to go and vote if you haven’t already. I just heard about it and I know nothing about the website.

  37. Paula,
    Yes, The MSM’s narrative for now is “Hillary dodges tough questions” and they say this is a criticism that will stick and haunt her.
    Let’s see!!

  38. It’ll be interesting to see what her campaign does in the next few days, whether that charge is something they feel a need to rebut.

  39. Paula,
    Yes, it will indeed be very interesting to see what how they react. The point is this – once we get over the primaries and confirm the nomination then she can perhaps take more solid stand – you see? She doesn’t have to be put in this position of walking such a tight rope.

  40. secret,

    i agree Edwards has no chance, but the annoying part is that he’s a leading attack dog on Clinton’s characters. How to deal with this situation? You go for kill on Edwards’ character but leave your own hands clean…

    I really hope Team Clinton will whip out some establishment backers to go for kill on Edwards’ characters and generate huge headlines. By doing so, this will put this attack dog on defense.

    For instance, if Kerry decides to secretly back Edwards, he can certainly have a ‘causual’ conversation with a major news agency to confirm that Edwards indeed used his dead boy to pimp for V.P. This sort of sensational story will definitely generate lots of media interest, and put this attack dog further on defense.

    Edwards has lots of shady stories Clinton’s surrogates can exploit. They need to get on the phone….

  41. Kostner, Kerry wouldn’t do that. Edwards is making a jerk of himself with these attacks and people who support Hillary will go after him for that. But, a really strong Hillary supporter whose son died visits this site alot so maybe be a little careful when tossing around the phrase “dead boy”.

  42. kostner- u are sooo right on this one. perhaps email your suggestion to team hillary? couldnt hurt. although i bet they are thinking of this. better yet-i hope some of her staff regularly reads this site-the most loyal hillary site on the net!

  43. Here’s Edwards’ dead boy story. it’s a bit old, but I doubt many of you even know, we need to refresh our memory. link in the next one to avoid delay…

    Kerry talked with several potential picks, including Gephardt and Edwards. He was comfortable after his conversations with Gephardt, but even queasier about Edwards after they met. Edwards had told Kerry he was going to share a story with him that he’d never told anyone else—that after his son Wade had been killed, he climbed onto the slab at the funeral home, laid there and hugged his body, and promised that he’d do all he could to make life better for people, to live up to Wade’s ideals of service. Kerry was stunned, not moved, because, as he told me later, Edwards had recounted the same exact story to him, almost in the exact same words, a year or two before—and with the same preface, that he’d never shared the memory with anyone else. Kerry said he found it chilling, and he decided he couldn’t pick Edwards unless he met with him again.

  44. The thing the MSM doesn’t understand (or can’t bring themselves to believe) is that Clinton has a significant base of very strong, very committed support. The MSM doesn’t see it because is it’s not the beltway elites for the usual left-wingnut suspects.

    I mean, seriously, what connections do the beltway pundits have to African American women or single mothers?

    It’s almost like a “silent majority” kind of deal and the polls have been showing it all year.

    My concern is that the Dems are going to force Clinton into primary campaign mode where she will have to take weak-kneed positions on national security that, along with an incompetent Democratic Party, will cost her the general election. Right now, Edwards and Obama are doing the heavy-lifting for the Republicans in the general election and Clinton can’t respond because of her desire to not attack Democrats.

  45. I’m going to digg that story on Edwards’ Iran double talk. Are people here registered at digg.com and Technorati? We need to promote blog posts there.

  46. mj,

    The archives crap is another in a long string of examples of the “Clinton Rules”. Nevermind that the archives of every POTUS and FLOTUS have been sealed for twelve years after they leave since the law was enacted. Nevermind that the current simian squatter in the White House has kept his father’s archives sealed by executive order when they were supposed to be released at the end of ’04.

  47. Paula,

    “What the heck does Halperin mean by this? ‘The dynamics for the political class of this race dramatically changed in that debate’.”

    Oh man, you had me laughin’ my A$$ off.

    To answer your question, I haven’t the foggiest, and I don’t think he does either. He was just doing what he always does, slammin’ Hillary.

    Halperin had to start back peddling though, after Linda Douglass said:

    “I heard from many women today they didn’t like seeing the one woman standing there in the middle of the stage being beaten up on by the men.”

  48. I mean, can you imagine if someone wanted yo make your letters public between you and your spouse? How is that even relevant? My husband and I work together and I don’t want anyone reading our emails back and fourth. I’ll be so disappointed if Dem’s by that bs. But, I did notice that Obama’s trying to find a new shtick as Hill is beoming the change candidate.

    My favorite line of the whole debate was when she said let’s turn the page on Bush/Cheney, let’s through away the whole book.

  49. Kostner,
    Yes – as we all agree that Edwards is no threat and the one to watch for is Obama. You are absolutely right about Edward being an attack dog for Obama. Now, his attack of Hillary may not help Edwards in the least bit – but it may help Obama. Despsite Obama’s attack on Hillary – he is being careful not to be vicious like Edwards. Why is that? Well – because why should he get his hands dirty when JE will do the work for him? Now people who get turned off at Edwards attack might go to Obama camp and a consolidation might occur there – Just thinking aloud! Or fence sitters who might be slighly leaning over Hillary may decide not to and opt of some other camp because of Edwards vicious attack. Again Edwards will not benefit from his attack – but the question is he is most certainly helping someone.

    Considering these facts – we are in a dilemma – we have to reign him in at the same time should seem to be engaging him.

    The best way to deal with this situation is to follow what you seem to suggest. Get the establishment to speak against Edward – get him to go on the defense. Keep the attack candidates on the defense so – Hillary can continue her positive campaign and can stay above the fray – without the “Pile on”

    So, it is way too important that they organize a way to put these attack dogs on the defense – so they don’t have the time to go on the offense against Hillary!!

  50. Considering these facts – we are in a dilemma – we have to reign him in at the same time SHOULD’NT seem to be engaging him.

  51. Secrets right. Edwards is desperate and Obama is hoping to be the beneficiary and he may just be, but I doubt it. I think he could end up another parking lot for Hillary voters for the interim though.

  52. Guys & Kostner [Tell me what you think]

    I was looking through several issues and this illegal immmigrants issue seems to me the most glaring issue that can be trouble for Hillary in GE.

    Because middle America obviously wants someone who would be tough on illegal immigrants – why is Hillary supporting her state Governor? What benefit might this bring at all for her? It seems today she has taken a stand to support her Governor in the license issue.

    Is this a mistake the Republicans can hit her with later?? I mean she cannot go back on this after winning the primary.

  53. Because state governors, especially in places like NYC, NY that would close down in a heartbeat with out the undocumented workers want to know who is out there, and as a matter of public safety they want drivers insured. Spitzer is doing the best he can because the fed’s dropped the ball. But Republican governors have also done this like Jeb Bush in Florida. Where ever there are alot of undocumented workers, Governors are looking to do this because it is becoming a public safety issue. Not just in terms of insured drivers, but fighting crime and such.

  54. MJ,

    I was seeing a show where this guy was saying that apparently 18 states allow licenses the way NY Governor proposes. The point is this

    When it comes to being tough on illegal migrants – the Republicans will simplify the issue into two categories

    Are you for it or against it. I know that she says she wants reforms on the issue – but she needs to say that cohesively

    She is for bipartisan reforms on illegal migration issue and since Bush has failed to do that – and until it is done – we need to know who is in our country – so – even for security reasons – we can keep a track of them.

    The point here is – she should distinguish herself from the bunch that proposes amnesty for illegal migrants.

    She needs to be very clear that giving licenses to these people is not doing them a favor but rather doing the legal citizens a favor – so we know how to track these poeple down and so forth.

    But she needs to make this into a punch line that is easily understandable for middle America and make sure Republicans don’t exploit the issue.

    At present the Democrats are attacking Hillary on this. These Democrats will never learn their lesson. Bloody disheartening – to see such a strong candidate they have and there they are producing fodder for Republicans!!!!

  55. This is so pathetic. She was quite clear that she sympathized with Spitzer because the Fed’s have failed, but that what we really need is comprehensive immigration reform.

  56. When I say pathetic I mean the media and the boys. They know this issue is more complex than a soundbite. It seems to me that the Boys bombed on trying to corner her on Iran or Iraq or anything, that’s why so much attention has been paid to this non-issue about whether she supports a state plan that has nothing to do with what she will do as President.

  57. MJ,
    I understand. Yes, unfortunately it has become so simplistic just to score points. So one has to adapt to this reality to make sure our message appeals and resonates with the rest of the country. I wanted her to emphasize that clearly so that in GE – when she says the same – it won’t be termed as “Flip-flop” – we know where she is in the policy – but already Obama camp is suggesting she dodges tough issues and has flip-flopped on social security and other issues. Now, these are the perceptions Obama and others want to create for Hillary – so, what I think is – her campaign needs to shrewdly decimate this perception.

  58. Secret, I think it depends in part on who the Republican candidate is . . .

    If it is Guiliani, then illegal immigration will be less of a wedge issue, because he has adopted a liberal position on the issue.

    But if it is Romney, then it will become a major wedge issue in the general election because he is a hardliner.

  59. Secret:

    You have to understand that Obama only cares about Obama. If he can’t be the nominee, he would rather see the Republicans win in 2008 so he can take another shot in 2012.

    I don’t know how old you are, but Democrats have a long history of blowing themselves out of the water in Presidential elections. Bloody the eventual nominee. Kiss off the Florida voters. It’s not just George Bush’s dirt that Hilary is going to have to sweep up. She’ll have a lot of work to do in March, just to clean up the Democratic mess.

    But, look on the bright side. She won’t be anywhere near as bloodied as Bill Clinton was in January 1992 facing the prospects of running against a popular incumbent President.

  60. HWC,
    Yes – Since I am an independent voter I wasn’t keenly following democratic politics before. I am a staunch Hillary supporter though.

  61. Hello all

    Here is a summary of what the MSM is writing. Now this is not a hit job. It is unfavourable to our candidate but I thought – it would be interesting to know how they perceive her and her weaknesses now –

    This is from Washingtonpost

    Clinton Regroups As Rivals Pounce

    By Anne E. Kornblut and Dan Balz
    Washington Post Staff Writers
    Thursday, November 1, 2007; Page A01

    After a rare night of fumbles by Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, her rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination rushed to maximize the damage yesterday, even as her advisers argued that the “piling on” engaged in by an all-male field of opponents will ultimately drive more female voters into her camp.

    Clinton strategists grudgingly acknowledged that the performance in Tuesday’s debate in Philadelphia was not her finest and they sought to contain the fallout. They worked to clarify her muddled response to a question about whether she supports giving driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants — she backs it, they said — and quickly produced a video, titled “The Politics of Pile-On,” splicing together in rapid-fire fashion her rivals’ attacks from the event.

    With little more than two months until the first primary contest, in Iowa, strategists for all the Democratic contenders agreed that the debate marked a turning point and would open a newly aggressive phase in the race.

    Clinton (N.Y.) sought to move forward yesterday and secure her position as the Democratic front-runner, accepting a major labor endorsement in Washington. But rivals focused on her missteps, in particular what they said was her defensive tone on the issues of Social Security and how to approach Iran, her unwillingness to freely share her and her husband’s White House papers from the 1990s, and especially her equivocation on the driver’s-license issue. Critics said Clinton’s performance played into a pre-existing caricature: that she is both secretive and calculating in her quest to win. Even Republican National Committee Chairman Mike Duncan weighed in to describe Clinton as “scary.”

    Former senator John Edwards (N.C.) — widely viewed as the most aggressive attacker Tuesday — is planning to kick off a new advertising campaign in Iowa today, with a 60-second spot that his strategists hope will boost his newly improved profile. Edwards challenged Clinton most forcefully on what he called “double talk” in her rhetoric, after weeks on the campaign trail questioning her integrity.

    Edwards was hardly alone in heaping criticism on the front-runner at the debate. Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) challenged Clinton for not releasing documents from her time as first lady, and Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (Conn.) accused her of giving President Bush license to invade Iran with her vote to label the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist entity.

    Clinton advisers privately criticized her opponents and the debate’s moderators. One strategist argued that nearly half of the questions posed by NBC’s Brian Williams and Tim Russert were aimed at Clinton, with other candidates taking softball questions about Halloween costumes (Obama) and unidentified flying objects (Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich of Ohio).

    “They really went from ‘Let’s talk about what I believe’ to ‘Let me try to do a gotcha against Hillary Clinton,’ ” said one Clinton adviser, speaking on the condition of anonymity. “Ultimately, it was six guys against her, and she came off as one strong woman.”

    Caught seemingly unprepared for a question about whether she backs a proposal by New York Gov. Eliot L. Spitzer to grant driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants, Clinton appeared to equivocate, prompting barbs from Edwards and Obama. Yesterday, her campaign issued a terse statement intended to clear up her position, although it, too, was vaguely worded.

    “Senator Clinton supports governors like Governor Spitzer who believe they need such a measure to deal with the crisis caused by this administration’s failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform. As President, her goal will be to pass comprehensive immigration reform that would make this unnecessary,” the statement said. Campaign advisers, pressed to explain her view more clearly, said that she ultimately supports the driver’s-license proposal.

    Her rivals clearly remained delighted by the turn of events. Edwards, in an interview with liberal talk show host Ed Schultz, promised to “keep pounding the drum on making certain the voters know they have these choices” between what he described as the entrenched special interests in Washington, represented by Clinton, and advocates of change such as himself.

    In an interview with the Associated Press in Des Moines, Obama said: “Her big answer on whether she would release the papers from her White House years was particularly troubling, because she is running on her record as first lady as much as on her record as a senator. How can people fully judge that record if the documents from those years remain locked away?”

    In a piece of good news for her campaign yesterday, Clinton was endorsed by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, one of the nation’s most politically active unions. The 1.4 million-member union represents about 30,000 workers in Iowa and expects to spend $5 million to $6 million in early primary states on Clinton’s behalf. The endorsement helped counter the decision by another labor group, the Service Employees International Union chapter in early-voting New Hampshire, to line up with Edwards.

    At the endorsement announcement, AFSCME President Gerald W. McEntee presented Clinton with boxing gloves and highlighted the campaign’s theme that Tuesday’s debate was little more than a group of men ganging up on the front-runner. “Some of you may have seen last night’s debate,” he said. “Six guys against Hillary. I’d call that a fair fight.”

  62. Another article –

    When Hillary Clinton has a bad night, she really has a bad night

    PHILADELPHIA — We now know something that we did not know before: When Hillary Clinton has a bad night, she really has a bad night.

    In a debate against six Democratic opponents at Drexel University here Tuesday, Clinton gave the worst performance of her entire campaign.

    It was not just that her answer about whether illegal immigrants should be issued driver’s licenses was at best incomprehensible and at worst misleading.

    It was that for two hours she dodged and weaved, parsed and stonewalled.

    And when it was over, both the Barack Obama and John Edwards campaigns signaled that in the weeks ahead they intend to hammer home a simple message: Hillary Clinton does not say what she means or mean what she says.

    And she gave them plenty of ammunition Tuesday night.

    Asked whether she still agrees with New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s plan to give driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants, Clinton launched into a long, complicated defense of it.

    But when Chris Dodd attacked the idea a moment later, Clinton quickly said: “I did not say that it should be done.”

    NBC’s Tim Russert, one of the debate moderators, jumped in and said to her: “You told (a) New Hampshire paper that it made a lot of sense. Do you support his plan?”

    ‘Saber rattling’ worries Democrats
    Specter’s pet project: Sexual abstinence
    GOP plots contempt strategy
    ”You know, Tim,” Clinton replied, “this is where everybody plays ‘gotcha.’”

    John Edwards immediately went for the jugular. “Unless I missed something,” he said, “Sen. Clinton said two different things in the course of about two minutes. America is looking for a president who will say the same thing, who will be consistent, who will be straight with them.”

    Barack Obama added: “I was confused [by] Sen. Clinton’s answer. I can’t tell whether she was for it or against it. One of the things that we have to do in this country is to be honest about the challenges that we face.”

    Earlier, when Clinton was asked whether she had made one statement on Social Security publicly and a conflicting answer privately, she ducked the question, saying she believed in “fiscal responsibility.”

    And when Russert asked her if she would make public certain communications between herself and President Clinton when she was first lady, she responded weakly: “Well, that’s not my decision to make.”

    Perhaps just as bad was her general tone and demeanor. All of her opponents seemed passionate about one issue or another. But Clinton seemed largely emotionless and detached, often just mouthing rehearsed answers from her briefing book.

    True, she was relentlessly attacked all night. But she can’t claim that she was stabbed in the back. She was stabbed in the front.

    “Who is honest? Who is sincere? Who has integrity?” Edwards asked and then provided the answer: Not Hillary.

    “She has not been truthful and clear,” Obama said at one point.

    Hillary Clinton will certainly live to fight another day. She still has a huge lead in the national polls, a good staff and a ton of money.

    But, in the past, Clinton could always depend on her opponents to lose these debates. All she had to do was stay above the fray to win.

    Those days seem to be over.

  63. The narrative seems to have developed. This is what we should be alarmed about.

    The narrative is – full throttle character assassination of Hillary.

    They have decided to question her stance in everything she says. Now – the problem with the debate is – since she takes non-commital stance so – she can move to the center to fight the Republicans next year – this narrative of her being evasive could resonate with the base.

    I hope it doesn’t!! But we will wait and watch.

    Does anyone have any opinion on this narrative?

    Because the next 2 months – this is all we will hear.

    The narrative is clear – all the Dem candidates – will keep harping the same criticism – which is to ask for specific policy and hope to pin her down on policies that are not popular in GE. Hoping to attack her constantly on double talk, evasive, calculating – these are obviously not differences in policy!! These are personal attacks. Questioning the integrity of the person!! Well – this is the start of the negative campaign.

    Unfortunately – the entire gang has gone negative at one given time. Very sad but true.

  64. Legalrealist, on the question of strategy which several of us were kicking around prior to the Tuesday debate, take a look at the blog posted by Chase Martyn, Managing Editior of the Iowa Independent, 3d, 4th and 5th paragraphs from bottom, which is consistent with the view I expressed. Not even Errol Flynn could stay above the fray when every pirate in the room was coming at him with a raised sword. In that case paries alone will not suffice. There must be elegant, proportionate RIPOSTS against these escalating attacks. Fortunately, our girl is Master of The Sword, and her opponents are vulnerable.

  65. “Fortunately, our girl is Master of The Sword, and her opponents are vulnerable”

    I hope that the next 2 months – the nutty leftists – will not consolidate – because Hillary is the ONLY chance for a democrat to win.

    Mark my words – if it is not Hillary on the Dem ticket – It will be a republican in the white house again!!!

    So – this is a turning point and it’s time to shed complacency and we have to root for Hillary more passionately that we did before.

  66. im looking forward to the next batch of polls next week to see the full impact of this debate. i am curious about the woman’s vote. they should be repelled by the pile on and mostly loaded questions asked only to clinton by bully russert. no questions about obama’s bigoted supporter, ophrah supporting while dealing with a sex scandal in her south african school, and rezko problem, nothing on edwards katrina forclosure problem, 2 america’s while living in a multi-million dollar home, and leading suppporter of the war, now a anti-war leftwing fringe, naderite, kusinich-type, hypicrite,foam at the mouth hillary bashing, ass that he is.

  67. terrondt,
    I am looking forward for the poll results myself. Anyways – we have 2 more months. She is the leading candidate. I think this is a turning point though. Once they get a narrative – everything you do will fit into that narrative. So, Hillary camp has to gauge the imapct it has made on the Dem base and swiftly respond. I am sure they will – but as Hillary supporters the time for complacency is over. We need to be vigil and active and do everything we can in our backyards to make her a success!!

  68. The assault on Hillary may have been a blessing of sorts.
    Things were going too smoothly. This will allow her
    campaign a few weeks to tighten up on the immigration
    issues, restate her Social Security POV (point of view) and
    and work on a tighter message for the last two debates.

    She should now take few shots at her opponents in the next debate. She needs more effective post debate spokes persons. I have felt for a long time her surrogates have been weak and
    have opened the door a lot of the criticism she has come under.
    You can only respond to Obama nonsense as it is not being a
    “policy of hope.” It gets old after six months.

    And she needs Bill in the audience. Yes, that’s right. The bashing
    would have been mitigateed if Bill had been present. Unlike the
    others, she has been standing on her own publically. Speaking]
    with one voice to combat the plethora of candidates and candidates spouses as well as the organized media against her.

    I can assure you, if Bill is at the next two debate there will be no
    piling on. The Democratic candidate if not Hillary, will need
    Bill’s support and I guarrantee you it will not come at the
    expense of beating up on Hillary. Remember, the second most
    popular Democrat is Hillary. Not the other dwarfs.

  69. Kegs,
    I think Bill is a tremendous assert with the Dems – but to lower him to the level of ordinary spouses will be a disservice to his popularity. He needs to be used wisely. You may be right that these attacks may comes as a blessing – if they capture this moment in time – and realize that time has come for her to give stronger and tighter messages. She needs a tough spokes person. As you say “abandoning the politics of hope” afater 6 months does sound jaded. Well – let’s see the next debate and see she fares – we will then know if her campaign has learnt from this debate!! More people are tuning in now and it is vital to give steller performances. As hard as they are being a front runner – she needs to get stay on message and not get off track. She should learn not to give any more openings!

  70. Secret, Bill’s presence at a debate will not lower him
    to ordinary spouse status. He is what he is, but it
    will put his public face in her campaign corner which
    has been missing recently. And it is precisely the point
    that people are tuning in now, that he needs to be

  71. Five strongly and one loosely against one (Sixagainst one) is ridiculous. What I understand though is that all have submitted. They accuse her on “Iran”. But she wins because the precise answer …she doesn’t approve rushing into war neither does she agree with shutting up and waiting for what may come like the others wish. An idea worth taking must be taken no matter whose idea it is. Hillary on Iran is timely and unquestionably right.
    Again they accuse her of her go ahead vote of the Iraq war. Again she was right, because the information available at the time required every person with a proper brain to say yes. To vote otherwise, one must have had reliable information from Baghdad and from a very senior Iraqi official to disprove what was on the table in Washington. And to have had such information and not have shared it with other congressmen or the Administration is a crime no less than treason. Her real position on Iraq is still a winner. She knows and will implement a smooth withdrawal without declaring defeat. Some naïve individuals assume it is quite easy and possible to pullout beginning at eleven o’clock this morning (I am writing at eight o’clock); they lack the perception of what it means and looks like to move one hundred forty thousand troops several thousand miles spontaneously aborting their mission to punish the president who stationed them there. This is wrong and Hillary stands out alone by knowing what is right.
    They also accuse her of being the Democratic candidate the Republicans want to contend in the general election. The truth, however, is Hillary is the only Democrat who can beat the Republicans. The American people are looking for a real leader, and they will find that in Hillary Clinton.

  72. Five strongly and one loosely against one (six against one) is ridiculous. What I understand though is that all are finished with what ever they have against her. They accuse her on “Iran”. But she wins because the precise answer …she doesn’t approve rushing into war neither does she agree with shutting up and waiting for what may come like the others wish. An idea worth taking must be taken no matter whose idea it is. Hillary on Iran is timely and unquestionably right.
    Again they accuse her of her go ahead vote of the Iraq war. Again she was right, because the information available at the time required every person with a proper brain to say yes. To vote otherwise, one must have had reliable information from Baghdad and from a very senior Iraqi official to disprove what was on the table in Washington. And to have had such information and not have shared it with other congressmen or the Administration is a crime no less than treason. Her real position on Iraq is still a winner. She knows and will implement a smooth withdrawal without declaring defeat. Some naïve individuals assume it is quite easy and possible to pullout beginning at eleven o’clock this morning (I am writing at eight o’clock); they lack the perception of what it means and looks like to move one hundred forty thousand troops several thousand miles spontaneously aborting their mission to punish the president who stationed them there. This is wrong and Hillary stands out alone by knowing what is right.
    They also accuse her of being the Democratic candidate the Republicans want to contend in the general election. The truth, however, is Hillary is the only Democrat who can beat the Republicans. The American people are looking for a real leader, and they will find that in Hillary Clinton.

  73. Hi all,

    I am reading all of your comments with keen interest. The only thing I’m not too happy about Clinton campaign is that they have not been aggressive enough to push back on her opponents, maybe they have a reason, maybe their polling data support such strategy.

    What I really want is to have them more vocal surrogates, I mean, very influential surrogates, to directly challenge the characters/flip-flop/trustiworthiness of her main opponents. Right now, she seems to be a bit lonely in the media, which is kind of unusual for a candidate backed by lots of influential congress men/women, governors, and senators.

    I think its time for her surrogates to take the gloves off. It’s very easy for Clinton’s surrogates to generate headlines. How about Rangel questioning Edwards playing race card? Can’t we get Kerry’s wife Teresa on record on how sleazy Edwards was by using his dead boy to pimp for V.P.?

    I don’t want her campaign to directly engage with these wimps, but these things should be done quickly to shift the attention back to those attack dogs.

  74. This is from ‘Taylor”s forum:

    ‘rumor only, I repeat rumor only, LAT is sitting on an explosive sex story involving one of the leading prez candidates. …’

    I’m pretty sure it’s Edwards. Why can’t LAT just go ahead to publish it?

    BTW, I’m a take-no-prisoner type of guy, especially to the wimps… so sorry for my aggressive language from time to time… LOL.

  75. First Read is ‘reporting’ Clinton camp’s strategies…

    Hillary’s Philly aftermath: A little less than 48 hours after the Philly Phracas, the Clinton campaign is in the midst of giving up denying they lost the debate. Instead, they’re trying to define how they lost. Strategy One: blame the media. She’s the front-runner, everyone saw her as the target, and the campaign appears intent on crediting the moderators for her problems — since it’s easier to blame the media (a trick usually reserved for the Republican side) than see one of her opponents get any credit. Indeed, Mark Penn yesterday held a conference call with key campaign fundraisers and repeatedly talked about the moderators. Our response: what part of front-runner doesn’t the campaign understand? We are two months and two days from the first round of voting, the tests are supposed to get harder — not easier.

    *** Strategy two: Don’t get caught in a back-and-forth with any one foe. Lump Obama and Edwards together so that Obama, in particular, doesn’t get to look like he’s rising above it all. (Camp Clinton loves that Obama’s negatives have been rising; they’d like to see that trend continue.) For example, the campaign yesterday released a video entitled “The Politics of Pile-On,” a take off on Obama’s “politics of Hope,” even though it was Edwards who led the charge on Tuesday. And, of course, engaging Edwards directly can breathe life into him and benefit Obama at the same time. Just ask veterans of the ‘04 Edwards campaign.

    *** Strategy three: use the debate to galvanize women so that it looks like a bunch of men ganged up on a woman, rather than simply a bunch of opponents ganging up on a front-runner. Coincidentally or not, Clinton today returns to her alma mater, Wellesley College, a liberal arts college for women. Think she’ll bring up Tuesday’s debate at the school?

  76. I agree with the principles of those strategies, and I’m glad to see Obama’s negativies are going up (seems to be some internal polls).

    But I’d like them to lump Russert together with the other male wimps… For example, if that clip includes Russert’s mouth-foaming, it will be terrific.

    But I still stick to my belief they need to whip out some heave-hitting surrogates to destroy Edwards/Obama tag-team…

  77. kostner,
    Me too, I am reading what is being said. I disagree with you about Clinton campaign not doing enough. I think it moving very intelligently.

  78. celiff,

    it’s been rumored for a long time, and both Huffinton and a tabloid magazine have reported it. Edwards campaing vehemently denied it. However, this story has not been pushed to MSM….

  79. hi admin,

    This is getting interesting. Chris Dodd just put on two more ads blasting both Clinton and Edwards in Iowa.

    The ‘Edwards’ one is extremely interesting. He’s using Edwards’ debate clip and painting him as a ‘screamer’.

    What’s the strategy behind Chris Dodd’s campaign? Why does he leave Obama alone?

  80. I got so used to Hillary kicking butt in debates I wasn’t ready for a subpar performance. I’m just disappointed she gave her opponents an opening. But this is a chance for her to elevate her game, and it was probably a necessary wake-up call. She’s a quick study and always learns from her rmistakes.

    Anyway, Joe Friday said it’s typical for POTUS and FLOTUS records to be selaed 12 years after a president leaves office. Why doesn’t her campaign say that? Because it’s clear Obama is going to keep pounding that.

  81. kostner, Could the sex scandal involve a GOP candidate instead, such as Rudy? I know about the Edwards rumors though.

  82. Dodd is running an anti-Clinton ad? Wow. Why? He has no chance of winning. Is there some deal between Dodd and Obama?

  83. admin, What do you think Hillary should do about the narrative that she’s dodgy? I think it needs to be addressed head on.

  84. I still haven’t gotten to see the first hour of the debate, so I can’t say yet how I feel it all went. But I saw Russert speaking with Meredith and he was practically gloating, he was expecting so see something unravel in the coming days. bastard.

    By the way, here’s a nice video report from politicking in NH, Hillary is being praised as opposed to Obama who is being talked about as standoffish. While they show Hillary being nice warm and friendly taking time to speak with everyone.
    Nice to get some positive news in all this current distress! 🙂


    By the way, both Edwards and Obama is supporting spitzers idea, and seemingly so does Hillary. This will be damaging in a GE, as not only republicans oppose such an idea with around 80% But democrats oppose this idea with around 70% I believe it was, and similarly with Independents. An interesting turn however is that Jeb Bush passed the idea! So JE and BO can’t attack her position, only the supposed wavering.

  85. Gorto, lot’s of Republicans have passed the DL law. What do you mean Tim was gloating about something unraveling? Could you be a little more specific?

  86. I have a sense the blog chattering class is not very comfortable with Edwards’ stunt.

    Here’s a little pile on from politico:

    17 white people (Updated)

    Jake Tapper notices something that also struck a few of my readers, in politics and out, about John Edwards new ad: Every single person who appears in it is white.

    That’s all 17 of the people in the foreground of various spots, and everybody in the background.

    This is Iowa, of course. The state is 94.5 percent white, meaning actually that if they’d had one black or Hispanic face in there, it would have been about representative.

    UPDATE: Edwards spokesman Eric Schultz writes that the woman pouring coffee early in the spot is Hispanic, putting them at more or less the same level of diversity that shows up in most candidate ads in Iowa. Her name is Leslie Gilbert, he said; her aunt is involved with the Iowa group Latinos United.

  87. SurveyUSA poll has Hillary with a slight lead over Rudy in Fla.

    A new SurveyUSA automated survey of 520 registered voters in Florida (conducted 10/24) tests Sen. Hillary Clinton against six potential Republican candidates for President and finds:

    Giuliani 45%, Clinton 49%
    Clinton 49%, McCain 46%
    Clinton 53%, Thompson 43%
    Clinton 55%, Romney 40%
    Clinton 55%, Huckabee 39%
    Clinton 54%, Paul 36%

    Of course, this is a week old now. Oh well, lol.

  88. The pile on was the best thing that could have happened. It proved she’s human and it proved she can take it – although, I am stunned by the questions that were asked. That she was a tad bit rattled at the end of it is okay. Even presidents aren’t perfect 100% of the time. She turned in a mighty performance and there isn’t a neutral observer that wasn’t impressed with how she handled herself. I know of one young male convert she won that night, and I’m betting he’s not the only one.

    So the campaign clarifies and moves on. We’re in good shape. The other candidates were reduced to being part of a bully pile-on. She’s still standing. that’s all that debate was about. Can she handle all of those guys and keep her wits about her – and she did.

  89. “The ‘Edwards’ one is extremely interesting. He’s using Edwards’ debate clip and painting him as a ’screamer’.”

    Chris Dodd accusing somebody else of being a screamer? Now, that’s rich!

    Dodd is the consumate screamer. A throwback to a bygone era of Senatorial pontification.

  90. Now this is really gonna piss ’em off!

    The Rasmussen daily tracking numbers are a four day moving average of about 150 interviews per night over four nights. Clinton has been trending down since the end of last week when she had hit a new all-time high. Down with Sunday night’s polling. Down with Monday night’s polling. Down with Tuesday night’s polling.

    Last night was the first night of polling after the debate and it was strong enough to bump Clinton’s moving four day average UP by 2%.

    Obviously, way too early to draw any conclusions, but the media is going to be seriously frosted if Clinton goes up in the polls.

    Dylan got it right in a song about annoying reporters:

    “There’s something happening here
    and you don’t know what it is,
    do you MISTER Jones?”

  91. hwc,

    I was going to post the same poll, but let’s just wait until next week to draw a firm conclusion…

    Rass is too volatile….

    Imagine Edward drops under 10…

  92. hwc,

    I’m not worried about Dodd. The strategy is to keep those male wimps to fight for 2nd spot, and make them look like a bunch of boys….

  93. From NBC/National Journal’s Athena Jones
    WELLESLEY, MA — Clinton was here at Wellesley College, her alma mater, to launch 120 groups of “Hillblazers” on college campuses, who she said would work to organize students and young voters.

    She reminisced about her life at Wellesley and afterwards and delivered a women-centered version of her usual stump speech to an exhilarated crowd of students from Wellesley, other nearby colleges, and members of the community. “I realize this is an ambitious agenda. Would you expect anything less from a Wellesley woman?” Clinton said to rousing applause.

    Clinton said America was ready to shatter that highest glass ceiling and told the audience “together we can make history.”

    The only reference Clinton made of Tuesday’s debate — or of her campaign against her Democratic male rivals — was this line: “In so many ways, this all women’s college prepared me to compete in the all boy’s club of presidential politics.”

    The context of the remark came when she was talking about Wellesley, reminiscing about her days as a student there, and how it taught her leadership and camaraderie.

  94. mj, if my memory serves me right, Russert was speaking especially on the drivers license thing. He looked content that he had finally ‘trapped’ her.

    And also, he look like he had been drinking heavily that night!!!!
    He looked unshaved and had a big red bloated nose!

Comments are closed.