Russert Wimps. Hillary Triumphs

Update: The video we posted below is only one of many great Hillary moments from last night’s speech. What Hillary says in that short clip is reminiscent of Bill Clinton’s speech to New Hampshire citizens in 1992. Back in 1992, under attack by just about everyone, Bill Clinton at the Elks Lodge said “I’ll be here for you—until the last dog dies.” “Now there are some who will say they don’t know where I stand,” she said. “Well, I think you know better than that. I stand where I have stood for 35 years. I stand with you and with your children and with every American who needs a fighter in their corner for a better life.

Last night we learned several things. First, Democrats need some professional messaging lessons. Holding auctions might be “down home” but not a good message to send. Events of such importance should not drift past midnight. Hillary and her team of professionals will bring good communications skills to all Democrats when she is in full charge of the Party.

We also learned that Edwards and Obama are incapable of learning the most simple lessons. In 2000 and 2004 Gore and Kerry listened to Michael Whouley and utilized the Jefferson-Jackson Day Dinner in Iowa to revive their campaigns. Gore and Kerry used the similarly sounding slogans “stay and fight” (Gore) and “stand and fight” (Kerry) at the dinner. Gore and Kerry signaled to Democrats they understood presidential campaigns were about the voters and fighting for what Americans need to better their own lives. Edwards and Obama last night essentially attacked Democrats as corrupt; Hillary put the blame where it belongs: on Bush and the Ripublicans and promised to “Turn Up The Heat” as she reassured voters that she will fight – for them.

We also learned that Richardson at the next debate will again resist joining the anti-Hillary desperate campaigns. “It is desperately important that Democrats not tear each other down,” Richardson said. Biden poked the Chicago crowd Obama imported, so it is possible that he will not join the anti-Hillary crowd at the next debate. Dodd rambled, but maybe his morbid poll numbers in Connecticut and near zero national poll numbers have convinced him that an anti-Hillary “electability” argument sounds foolish.

Edwards needed to rescue his campaign last night, not with a speech, but with a galvanizing message. He failed.

Obama appeared to have trouble with either too much or too little intake of Nicorette gum. Obama confused anger with passion. Obama tried to appear to be with the living instead of his usual Ivory Tower slumping delivery, but only came across as angry, very angry. Obama delighted in attacking Democrats and their chances in November 2008. When I’m your nominee, my opponent won’t be able to say that I supported this war in Iraq; or that I gave George Bush the benefit of the doubt on Iran; or that I support that Bush-Cheney diplomacy of not talking to leaders we don’t like. And he won’t be able to say that I wavered on something as fundamental as whether it’s ok for America to use torture – because it’s never ok. That’s why I’m in it. Ugly stuff from Obama.

Obama, who spends more than other candidates on polls and promises unity bathed himself in mud politics. This party – of Jefferson and Jackson; of Roosevelt and Kennedy – has made the most difference in people’s lives when we’ve led, not by polls, but by principle; not by calculation, but by conviction; when we’ve had leaders who could summon the entire nation to a common purpose – a higher purpose. And I am running for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States because that’s the party America needs us to be right now. Obama sounds more and more like Ronald Reagan who quoted Democrats but whose intent was the defeat of Democrats.

The naive Obama said I don’t want to pit Blue America against Red America, I want to lead the United States of America. Obama’s rhetoric is sweet but as we all know, it takes two to tango. The Ripublicans do not want compromise, they want capitulation.

After spending recent weeks lambasting those who fought for civil rights, Obama dared invoke one of the great fighters of the last century. Obama praised Dr. King but apparently understands none of Dr. King’s lessons. Dr. King’s “fierce urgency of now” was not a call for brotherhood but rather for justice. In the name of conciliation Obama offers retreat and weakness. Little wonder that Americans fear his inexperience.

Obama said: Because I will never forget that the only reason I’m standing here today is because someone, somewhere stood up when it was risky. Stood up when it was hard. Stood up when it wasn’t popular. And because that someone stood up, a few more stood up. And then a few thousand. And then a few million. And together, standing up, with courage and clear purpose, they somehow managed to change the world. But again Obama fails to understand that it wasn’t just about standing up, it was standing up and fighting for what you believe. It is not sweet words of understanding but tough actions and taking the heat.

The liberal Mother Jones magazine summed up Obama’s night and the level of support for him: “I’m not sure the speech actually earned it. It wasn’t his best.”

Hillary of course was great. She modulated her voice, whispering when needed, sounding a clarion call for unity against the Ripublicans who have looted the American economy and subverted our government with incompetence and grotesque policies.

Hillary took on her bashing critics, particularly Obama: “Change is just a word if you don’t have the strength and experience to make it happen. We must chose a nominee who has been tested and elect a president who is ready to lead on day one.” Aong with making her long history of fighting for Americans clear, “As First Lady, I fought my heart out for health care.” Hillary rightly took credit for the progress universal health care is making in 2007.

Hillary will not fall into the trap other Democrats have fallen into of attacking fellow Democrats.

“I’m not interested in attacking my opponents,” New York Senator Clinton, 60, said yesterday in Des Moines at the annual Jefferson-Jackson Dinner, a fundraiser for the Iowa Democratic Party. “We should be turning up the heat on the Republicans.” [snip]

At least one political observer gave Clinton high marks for her speech last night.

Clinton was very, very good,” said Charlie Cook, independent analyst and publisher of the Cook Political Report in Washington. “She’s had a tough 10 days or so, I think she turned in the performance she needed.”

Clinton touted support she’s received from Democratic leaders in Republican-leaning states such as Arkansas who “know that I can win.” She also noted the endorsement she won last week from Ohio Governor Ted Strickland.

“Democrats know when we win Ohio, we win the White House,” she said.

Still, Clinton said she’s also prepared for a tough fight as the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses draw near.

“I know as the campaign goes on, it’s going to get a little hotter out there, but that’s fine by me,’‘ Clinton said. “As Harry Truman said, if you can’t stand the heat get out of the kitchen, and I’ll tell you what, I feel really comfortable in the kitchen.”

Clinton called on Democrats to fight harder to champion civil rights, combat climate change and end the war in Iraq. On cue, her supporters chanted the refrain “turn up the heat.”


Tim Russert embarrassed himself today. Russert did not put up nifty videos of Obama followed up by tough questions implying a contradiction – like he does to Hillary. Russert asked a few questions which touched on a few issues, but Russert was just going through the motions. Russert proved himself a hack today.

Hillary proved herself a champ at the Jefferson-Jackson Day Dinner. Hillary turned up the heat.

We’ll get the transcript and analyze Obama on Meet The Hack Press when the transcript is posted. We will also post more Hillary video and speech excerpts as they come in.


238 thoughts on “Russert Wimps. Hillary Triumphs

  1. From Newsweek:

    Is John Edwards in trouble in Iowa? Peg Dunbar thinks so. She signed up as a county chair for Edwards in the northeastern town of Waverly earlier this year, after backing the former senator’s campaign in 2004. Now she has changed her mind and switched to Hillary Clinton. “John Edwards has been in Iowa for four and a half years and he’s in third place,” she says. “He should be in first place. Granted, it’s very, very close. But I don’t see him going anywhere and I don’t go with a loser.”

    Dunbar is one of four county chairs—essential figures in any Iowa campaign—who have backed out since being identified as Edwards chairs in a June press release. Ernie Schiller of Lee County says he’s now undecided, Frank Best of Louisa County has switched to Obama and Jody Ewing is supporting Bill Richardson.

    Iowa voters are notoriously fickle and pick their candidates late in the game. But county chairs are not just any voters. They are the key grass-roots figures who help deliver votes on caucus night, now less than two months away. Four years ago, news of defections hurt Dick Gephardt over the summer and Howard Dean just before caucus night.

    The Edwards campaign says the defectors are just a handful of people among more than 4,000 supporters listed in press releases. “We have rolled out more public supporters than any other campaign,” says Dan Leistikow, Edwards’s spokesman in Iowa. “We feel very good about the strength of our organization.” The Edwards campaign also identified three supporters it had poached from other campaigns. When contacted by NEWSWEEK, one denied having switched; the other two were initially Obama backers who switched after their unions endorsed Edwards.

    The county chairs are not the only losses for Team Edwards. Several other backers, all named in prior press releases, have also defected. Gary Anhalt was named as an “education professional for Edwards” in September, but says he’s now uncommitted. Barton Rule was a former Tom Vilsack supporter who endorsed Edwards, but says he’s now backing Clinton, as is Jay Kleaveland, a rural chair for Edwards in Clayton County.

    Polling in Iowa is imprecise, but most show Edwards losing ground of late. No poll has put him in front since August. In the last month he’s been either tied with Obama for second place, or several points behind him in third. Campaigns can always replace individual supporters—but reversing a trend is much harder.

  2. This was one of hillary’s best speech!

    I thought dodd acted like a peacock…

    Obama specch was filled with “angry”

    Edwards was sorrily, personally emotional! ….

    Biden’s speech while good and honest in content lacked the flow….

    Well: if hillary does not do it, it will be a long shot for biden….otherwise there is no one left in thjs group to hold it for the dems!

  3. Great SPEECH.

    I am just hoping that this FEEDING FRENZY over every little step HILLARY makes will be over soon.

    I wish she would fight back. But I know that 1) She is running a positive campaign and 2) Its best in the eyes of the VOTERS to be POSITIVE.

    But I am just sick and tired of these attacks on her.

  4. It was one of her best speeches. They didn’t show where I was sitting. We had an even larger crowd across from the one in the video. I am dissapointed CSPAN didn’t show our angle during her speech. The media platform was right across from us, they must have given CSPAN a special area.

  5. I think rebutting via hillary’s facthub is a good way and a start of foghting back…she can turn up the heat as we go long into the last few days…

    Also it is easier to track via the hub “he said/she said” vs. ongoing fighting in the HAWISK mainstream media

  6. I don’t want her to fight back, I want her to cut loose. She’s great off the cuff, and I wish she’d campaign that way a little more.

  7. link to hillary’s full speech last night? also-yepsen is saying obama may have turned iowa to hsi favor last night. i do not believe him fully as he routinely goes after hrc all the time. hillary was never supposed to actully win iowa-but it sure looks like she will do very well there.

  8. WTF? If Iowa laps up that sort red state blue state crap, I hope Hillary packs it up and goes to Florida. No offense, Celiff, but it feels like we are hostage to Yepsen and Iowa.

  9. Seeing is believing. The above clip gives those of us who were not in Iowa last night a sense of just how powerful and inspirational Hillary’s speech was to the audience, much as Celiff reported.

    During the course of her speech, Hillary highlighted the central contadiction of the Obama candidacy: “Change is just a word if you don’t have the strength and experience to make it happen. We must nominate a nominee who has been tested, and elect a President who is ready to lead on Day 1.”

    And what is Obama’s response? He claims that he is guided by principle, not polls, and never ever triangulates (which I take to mean considers more than two sides of any question). What he is saying in effect is: jjjjjjust trust me. . . .

  10. The more I see of Obama, the less I like him. He doesn’t sound like Presidential, he sounds just like Tom Friedman.

    Russert didn’t pin him down on the lies he tells about Senator Clinton.

    “I didn’t say I woud meet with rogue leaders, I said I would be willing to meet with rogue leaders.” Is this a class in metaphysics? Senator Clinton never said she was unwilling to meet, she said ‘I will not commit to meet with this bunch of assholes without preconditions.’ Obama flip-flops on his Youtube commitment. So where’s the ‘distinction’ he’s talking about.

    “I’m not afraid of losing a propaganda war with Ahmanidejad.” But it’s not a zero sum game. It’s not about losing a propaganda war, it’s about giving him a propaganda boost–the way Putin did when he took a photo-op with that psycho. How will Israel react to the American President doing what Putin did for Ahmanidejad? He still doesn’t get the ‘distinction’ between diplomacy and presidential meetings.

    On Kyl-Lieberman, let me get this straight–it’s bad for Iran to sponsor attacks against Israel, but fine for Iran to sponsor attacks against American troops?

    On lobbyists, I take money but I’m against taking money?

    Most importantly, we don’t see him taking the heat. Can Obama take the heat? We know Senator Clinton can. Russert patronized Obama and Obama let him do it. When a white man patronizes a black man, that is an insult–an insult Obama is clearly used to and comfortable with.

  11. i still think obama bused in lots of students from chicago. there is psotive stuff out there on hillary on time sayignshe found her voice. she did what was needed to firm up her supporters and leaners for the final push. caucus night is about who is most committed and most determined to show up! i think hillary’s folks are msot committed bar none. hillary has alos doubled her staff in iowa int he past few weeks-i think we will see these new efforts pay off as well

  12. Those were people mostly from Chicago, as Joe Biden pointed out, and Yepsen is and has always been a jackass. Someone I know that works at the register told me he is unliked there and thinks he’s God.

  13. Oh thank you, texan. I loved her speech last night and hearing that yepsen said jack squat about it had me unhinged.

  14. Oh, btw, there were like 15 tables with Hillary placards on them and Afscme placards on them on the floor where the donors ate, and there were 5 with Obama placards.

  15. From Staff: A few things to keep in mind below.

    A lot of influential people are reading this website. Many are from the media and many more are some of the top people from the campaigns. There are also a lot of readers from around the world. Let’s keep that in mind, especially during volatile periods in the campaign.

    The past few days have been volatile in several ways. There is first of all a concerted and loosely coordinated attack on Hillary (by all the candidates and certain figures in Big Media) and most important to keep in mind – on her supporters and paid workers.

    The attacks on Hillary have been ineffective thus far so attention is being focused on her supporters and campaign workers. The campaign is expanding rapidly and less experienced hands are coming on board, especially in the key states such as Iowa, which makes slip ups easier to occur. Even Hillary’s ex-cat is being used to attack Hillary.

    Silly stories such as “plants” and “tips” will crop up during these volatile periods because Hillary is such a strong candidate. On the plant story specifically, there is no Bush type campaign policy of having “plants” ask questions. That policy is useful only for brainless Bush types who can’t handle questions.

    Hillary is very good on her feet so she does not need help by using “plants”. That said, some new hires might do something stupid or even more experienced hands might want to impress themselves or their friends with stupid dumb tricks or even dumb attempts to help nervous questioners with ideas.

    The point is that Hillary is strong so the target has shifted to her supporters and workers who are a lot less experienced (this is “chain is as strong as its weakest link” theory). That’s why we are getting stories about “plants” and “tips” – these are NOT stories about Hillary but about her workers and supporters.

    The polls have also been volatile in minor ways in New Hampshire. Hillary is still way ahead just about everywhere. When big events occur, like the concerted debate attack on Hillary, there will be fluctuations in polls as the campaign adjusts to the new campaign tactics of opponents. There will also be a tightening in polls as voting day approaches. Overall, even in NH Hillary’s support is the most committed and the strongest. Let’s keep that in mind.

    Let’s also remember that a lot of people in the campaign are working on little sleep. Lack of sleep is not an excuse but it does highlight the need for all of us to help Hillary in what ever ways we can. The campaign staff and supporters and Hillary are under the most intense scrutiny at the same time that they are most overworked. They are bound to make mistakes and while we do not like or tolerate mistakes let’s also help share the load.

    Celiff and alcina and freckles and others are working on the streets not just online. A lot of people are doing online work and real world work. Simple things like wearing a button in public or speaking out for Hillary in the real world is a way to help out.

    Remember that Iowa voters and NH voters and most voters are not fixated on what Big Blogs say. Let’s not get into a bubble – let the other campaigns be in a bubble. The online world is not as important as many think. Walking with a Hillary button on – on the streets or walking through an entire train load of passengers instead of sitting down – might be more important than we think. Many Hillary supporters think they are alone and love to see shows of support for Hillary.

    Hillary needs to take care of her health. Her staff and supporters and all of us need to take take of health matters too. DCDemocrat and Kegs have some recent experience in this area and know the need for physical and mental health. Campaigns are stressful periods. All Democrats, from all campaigns should take care of their health – we will be united soon and needed against the Ripublicans.

    If you are getting too stressed with day-to-day events, especially when Hillary is under attack – talk a walk for a few minutes. Realize that Hillary is the best candidate and has the best team. We’re going to win. Relax. Get your blood pressure back to normal then return to the computer screen. Getting emotionally upset leads to mistakes and foolishness. [This advice is easy to dispense and much more difficult to practice – we assure you we know how difficult it is not to scream while listening to a barrage of ugly, unfair attacks.]

    All the campaigns are pivoting and changing tactics. There will be some back and forth until the nomination is wrapped up. But let’s keep our eyes on the real prize: The White House.

  16. Also, she is the only one that went into the crowd afterwards to her supporters in the balcony. She is amazing, she is unbeatable, and she will win Iowa, I have no doubt. Just because Obama can bring in a bunch of kids from Chicago, we had real Iowans.

  17. At least one political observer gave Clinton high marks for her speech last night.

    “Clinton was very, very good,” said Charlie Cook, independent analyst and publisher of the Cook Political Report in Washington. “She’s had a tough 10 days or so, I think she turned in the performance she needed.”

    Clinton touted support she’s received from Democratic leaders in Republican-leaning states such as Arkansas who “know that I can win.” She also noted the endorsement she won last week from Ohio Governor Ted Strickland.

  18. Russssert didnt “wimp”…that implies that Russert was squishy cause he was fearful of a hard response of some sort….no…he chose to go gentle cause…

    1) he and his crowd want a horse race more than anything

    2) he and his Nantucket crowd HATE HILLARY …not O’Barry….he’s a “one of the club” kinda fella, someone that Sally Quinn would happily have over for cocktails and an arugulla salad with Timmy and Ms. Orth…a deferential but sharing the glamor kinda fella….plus he’s bashing and sliming Hillary too, saying she’s a liar, corrupt and dishonest…

    Theyre kinda Guy!

    My fave part was about obama – this man of the people – the working mans friend -talking about his bud that made 43 mill last year. Yeah that guy and Rezko…interesting friends Barry does choose to hang out with.

    Hee’s their kinda guy!

  19. I don’t think it matters whether Obama got his people loaded in a bus from Chicago. We should keep our focus on the real thing. Winning Iowa. Everything else is noise. Oh, how much I wish I were in Iowa. I would have volunteered for Hillary. I could have helped her campaign in some way.


    Thanks for eveything you do for Hillary’s campaign. We don’t say that often enough.

  20. someone above mentioned that Barry said something at the JJ about not using polls to triangulate…uh…lets see….then why in his financial reporting does it have him spending 2 – 3 times more on polling than Hill?

    If he did say this – whack him will ya Admin…Puleeze????

    ….now back to the Redskins….

  21. someone above mentioned that Barry said something at the JJ about not using polls to triangulate…uh…lets see….then why in his financial reporting does it have him spending 2 – 3 times more on polling than Hill?

    If he did say this – whack him will ya Admin…Puleeze????

    and your mid stream note above on what to keep in mind was terrific…quite terrific…

    ….now back to the Redskins….

  22. I cannot confirm this, but it is a well known fact that so many people that were there were from Illinois, and I think Joe Biden was right. I like Biden, he’s my second choice, not that I will need one (:
    The majority of that audience for Obama was from Chicago. Most were staffers and interns too. We had to help elderly people, veterans and so many others get seated. We had so many supporters, and as usual, almost no one is giving the event a fair look-over.

  23. He is among the few, and it is frustrating. I kept in mind the whole night that we are going to turn out the most caucus-goers. And btw, you know that stupid chant obama-ites do, fired up ready to go, well, a supporter last night of ours was yelling “Fired Up, She’s Ready To GO!” It was funny.

  24. celiff — isn’t it fair to say that most of the 9K in attendance are already committed supporters? Why is this dinner presented as an opportunity to score activists?

  25. Last night Hillary Clinton did what the roar of the Democrats crowd has been asking our Democratic leaders to do – she point by point stated what Democrats stand for.

    Without demeaning or misrepresenting any other Democrat running for office – she clearly articulated what we, the Democrats, believe and stand for.

    Today, on Meet the Press Barack Obama continues to misrepresent (I am trying to be nice here) the Senator’s position on Social Security, Iraq, withdraw of our military from Iraq, Iran and so many others. As the very junior senator from Il struggles to find differences from himself and the junior senator from NY, it is important that his supporters not just look at what he is saying in 1 minute sound bites – like social security where he stated “So on social security for example, she has maintained, it appears, that if we just get our fiscal house in order that we can solve the problem of Social Security” when in fact what Senator Clinton said was, returning to fiscal responsibility is the first step, then she would appoint a bi-partisan commission to address Social Security’s long term challenges that would consider a variety of options. Today, Barack Obama said exactly the same thing without acknowledging Senator Clinton’s whole statement. Time and time again this is the case. Saying the Senator is not forthcoming with the documents from the Bill Clinton years – I would direct him to Executive Order 13233, which limits access to the records of former United States Presidents. It was drafted by then White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales and issued by President George W. Bush on November 1, 2001. I would further direct him and Mr. Edward’s people to the fact that Bill Clinton publicly objected to this order and in fact the document that Russert waved at Senator Clinton was a five year old letter asking the US Archivist to speed up the process. So he asks for the release of President Clinton’s documents which are protected by law, under his objection – but Obama will not release his own – he say’s, and I quote “I don’t know”. He says the Senator from NY takes money from lobbyists, while making excuses about the funding he received to win his seat in the Il legislature and senate seat from Il. He aligns with a homophobe and says he is for Gay rights (a point Senator Clinton made last night without excuse or nuisance).

    It is not enough to just read the headlines, listen and take for gospel the one minute sound bites. Every concerned citizen should look deep into the headlines – I realize Senator Clinton (whom I obviously support) does not give short and simple answers – that is because we don’t live in simple times. We live in serious and dangerous times and we need a strong, wise and serious leader.

  26. Pretty much everyone there was committed. It was basically the figurehead beginning to the runup to the caucuses. Essentially, you are right, a show off contest.

  27. HillaryLandRocks,

    No. I don’t believe the peacock show demonstrates anything. It’s just a psychological warfare for clueless DC punditry.

    Remember 4 years ago, Howard Dean also bussed in the most raucous college kids from neighbouring states. Ron Paul had the most vocal supporters before Ames straw polls. We all know what happened…

    Obama is DC punditry’s favorite, no doubt it. He will lose GE in a landslide fashion.

  28. admin, i watched mtp and it wss crap. he russert brushed up on rezko, the iranian march vote, and a few others but he did not come at obama hard with follow ups and he let obama respond as long as he can with spin answers. i knew this a##hole whould give him a free pass.

  29. folks,

    I have a eerie feeling this is like Bush vs. Kerry in 2004. In the end of 2004 campaign, the press was in full-scale onslaught on Bush. They hit him on ‘dodge’ story, they hit him on ‘cocaine’ use, Kerry was also on a dailykos rantings… It looked so promising that Kerry might have actually won…

    In the end, it’s all noise. The truth is Obama is only appealing to liberal elitists, and working class simply do not buy into his stupid ‘hope’ rheotric.

  30. celiff —

    Are you able to comment on the value (or not) of out-of-state volunteers to efforts in IA? I’m pretty sure my accent would peg me as an out-of-stater (worse — an East Coast liberal). What types of tasks are available during the final push (say two weeks up to the caucus) that would be useful to the campaign while not undermining it?

  31. kostner: Kerry was also on a dailykos rantings

    My feeling is that the so-called ‘big bloggers’ will rally around Obama soon in a desperate anti-Hillary push.

  32. kostner: liberal elitists

    Prior to this primary I would have described myself as a liberal elitist. What I have learned is that, in fact, I’m not.

  33. Time Running Short for Obama (Agence France Presse, 10/11, 4:00 EST)

    But firing up devoted followers is one thing, halting the Clinton juggernaut another.

    Obama’s asset as a new voice is the flip side of his weakness: he is still green as a campaigner, analysts said.

    “Obama has had a number of missteps that we can chalk up to inexperience,” said Dennis Goldford, a political science professor at Iowa’s Drake University.

    Obama’s offer earlier this year to meet leaders of US enemies like North Korea and Iran played into the Clinton theme he is too naive to be entrusted with the Oval Office.

    It may have also caused Democrats, who believe President George W. Bush stole the 2000 election and unfairly skewered John Kerry on national security in 2004, to envision Obama as the target of fierce Republican assaults.

    And the Illinois senator’s message, of hope and healing divisions, sometimes seems to jar with the party’s acerbic mood.

    “Edwards is running from the the left, and Clinton is running from the right, and Obama is running from above,” Goldford said, questioning whether Obama’s lofty rhetoric fits the mood of Democrats.

    Obama is also hampered by expectations, after bursting on the scene with a soaring speech at the Democratic convention in 2004, which left the party swooning.

    While hitting the heights several times since, Obama also sometimes lapses into the plodding persona of the law professor he once was and is yet to hit top form in a Democratic debate.

    Obama has also rejected the idea that his race is a factor for voters, as he strives to become America’s first African-American president.

    Could it be that Obama’s problems spring, not from his weakness, but Clinton’s strengths?

    “The answer is so clear in the poll data … number one is strong leadership, the other is electability,” said Steffen Schmidt, professor of political science at Iowa State University.

    An NBC-Wall Street Journal poll this week found Clinton had a 76 percent to 41 percent lead among Democrats asked who had the knowledge and experience to be president.

    The Iowa caucuses will be a moment of truth for Obama and another top Democrat John Edwards. Should Clinton win, she may roll all the way to the nomination.

    But there are glimmers of hope for her rivals.

    Iowa voters are notorious for making up their minds late, and many Democrats elsewhere are only now tuning into the race.

    The Iowa race is very close, virtually a dead heat and Cary Covington, political science professor at the University of Iowa said that “absent some major mistake from the Clinton campaign” that is the way it will stay.

    So, Obama has just seven weeks to change the dynamic.

    First, he must establish momentum. Aides say that in four early primary states New Hampshire, Iowa, Nevada and South Carolina, Obama is “closing in” on Clinton.

    Obama is increasingly targeting Clinton’s weaknesses, accusing her of dodging questions after a shaky performance in the last Democratic debate.

    He argues he is more likely to expand the Democratic tent in 2008, than Clinton, with her high negative poll ratings.

    But attacking Clinton calls for delicacy. Her camp already says he has soiled his “politics of hope.”

    And gotcha politics doesn’t seem Obama’s game.

    “If he goes negative, there is a possibility that it might even hurt him,” said Costas Panagopoulos, of the Campaigns Management program at Fordham University.

  34. There are out of staters here from New York, Massachusetts, and New Jersey, as well as from places like Ohio, Illinois, Texas, and California, so the things they will be doing will be calls to make sure supporters are caucusing and driving people that can’t get there to the caucuses.

  35. kostner and celiff:

    I’ve got your proof right here. Here’s the Obama campaign specifically recruiting in Maryland, LOL, to get people to the JJ dinner in IA — LOL.

    Maryland!! Can you imagine how many Chicagoans attended?

    Fire it Up! Ready to Go! from Maryland

  36. HillaryLandRocks,

    Wow, excellent finding. Gosh he went as far as to Maryland… Can you dig out more??? We may be on sth here…

  37. Can I just say I absolutely, positively despise the “Fired up! Ready to go!” chanting!

    Especially in that video in the previous post, where he did his southern ‘drawl’ act. Again, no word from the press about that. But when Hillary read a poem(or something similar) with the authentic accent, she got blasted for it. *shakes head* I guess he is ‘allowed’ to speak that way because he is (half)black, but then it’s required that we completely forget the fact that he NEVER speaks in that way anywhere else then in those parts of the country and in black churches.

    Anyways, I hope I can find the video of Hillary at the JJ dinner, I would love to see it as people here are bragging about her 😀 ps. russert can go and f*** himself!

    It’s past midnight and the Iowa Democrats’ Jefferson-Jackson dinner is finally over. All of the six presidential candidates gave, to varying degrees, rousing speeches.

    But the night came down to Clinton vs. Obama. After all, they were placed side-by-side in the lineup and both closed out a long night.

    Obama gave his sharpest speech in a long time, perhaps since the ’04 Democratic convention that put him on the map. He was blunt, specific, visionary and, though he didn’t mention her by name, biting in his critique of Clintonism.

    “The same old Washington textbook campaign just won’t do it this election,” Obama said, echoing a refrain throughout the speech. “That’s why not answering questions because the answer may be unpopular just won’t do it…Triangulation and poll-driven positions, because they’re worried about what Mitt or Rudy might say about us, just won’t do it.”

    Obama argued that Democrats needed to rally around a candidate who, unlike Clinton, wasn’t bound by past mistakes. “When I’m your nominee, my opponent won’t be able to say that I supported this war in Iraq’ or that I gave George Bush the benefit of the doubt on Iran; or that I support that Bush-Cheney diplomacy of not talking to leaders we don’t like.”

    On the issue of foreign policy, in particular, he sought to distinguish himself from Clinton and tie her to Bush. “I am running for President because I am sick and tired of Democrats thinking that the only way to look tough on national security is by acting and voting like George Bush Republicans,” he said.

    Even as the auditorium was half full and the crowd was sleepy, Obama turned in a great performance.

    Unfortunately for him, so did Hillary. She knew exactly who her audience was and tonight was nothing if not a partisan Democrat. She swatted away some of the emerging attacks from her opponents with ease. “Change is just a word,” she said, “if you don’t have the strength and the experience to enact it.” It was as if she was telling Obama and Edwards: go to your room.

    For once, she acknowledged her doubters. And she did her best to put those doubts to rest. “There are some who say you don’t know where I stand. I think you know better than that. I stand where I’ve stood for 35 years–I stand with you!”

    It’s a corny line, but it was effective. The speech was designed to say: I’m a fighter.

    At the same time, Clinton argued that the real fight needed to be with the Republicans. “I’m not interested in attacking my opponents,” she claimed, while subtly attacking them. “We should be turning up the heat on the Republicans.”

    Hillary is sharpening her general election message while Obama is finally realizing he first needs to win the Democratic primary. It should be an interesting next 50 days.

  39. You know, in one of those lates polls….hmmm was it the one from NH..? I believe is was, where it showed that Hillary had lost support mostly from older men. Well, those people ought to get a chance to read Taylor Marsh’s latest post, regarding the long list of veterans whom support Sen. Clinton.

    Paragraph:”There’s no doubt Clinton, Obama and Edwards, as well as the other Democratic candidates, have equal respect and commitment to our veterans and active duty soldiers. That’s not in question. But Clinton has more military support than her husband ever gained as candidate or president, though no one in her campaign will state that fact. Does this matter to you, especially those of you who don’t “trust” her or question her honesty? Should the opinion of these veterans, who have put their lives on the line and know what our troops are doing right now, matter? The list is impressive, whether you’re willing to give Clinton the credit or not.

    I challenge the men who won’t vote for Clinton “no matter what” as it’s said in the press to check their prejudices. What do they think they know (or you think you know) better than these distinguished veterans?

  40. I’m so sick of Obama, who is going to say hey 7 years ago you voted with those who gave Bush authority, so there? Everyone knows this is Bush’s war and we are stuck in a quagmire. Now people just care about who is going to get us out.

  41. realist thanks for this article.

    My favorite part: “It was as if she was telling Obama and Edwards: go to your room.”

    Oooohhh SNAP!!!!! hahaha, I love these lines, so short and effective, probably this effective because they’re short.
    I think whenever the media in their retelling of an event, can bring out the age difference, it only helps Hill and hurt Obambi, he not only is young, but he looks the part too. And as he tries to shout “But but…Bill Clinton was young too…”
    Well…was America at war?? Theres your answer!

  42. just returned from an afternoon of canvassing for our girl. it was made easier after seeing senator clinton give that great speech last night. that is the best i have heard from her since the labor day kick-off speech in concord, nh. ( you can view the 9/2/07 speech it in its entirety on cspan ) both speeches are lessons in positive campaigning, instilling real pride and hope for the future. this is where senator clinton shines.

    admin, as usual, thanks for the advice post. you always manage to bring me back to center. it is also great advice in playing certain cards close to the vest.

  43. Just another quote from Taylor at the link I posted above. It’s a good one worth re-reading:

    “So again, tell me what you, oh wise men and women who won’t vote for Hillary for any reason, know that the above distinguished veterans do not. Why do they trust her and are willing to place our soldiers’ lives in her hands, but you think she is not honest? What do you know that they do not?”

  44. HillaryLandRocks,

    I’d like to know how you uncovered that event page? I really really you (or maybe you also tell me) how to do a systematical search of how widely this was done by his campaign. I need to collect every single page.
    The more, the better.

    We can definitely push this story to MSM to uncover his fraudulent ‘organizational strength’…

  45. Kegs you got good eyes. 🙂

    Another thing women can do as they please, not always stuck in a black or gray suit.

    Although I wish she would use that more to her advantage, I would love to see her wear something eye catching in the next debate, really stand out from the rest of them. Something really blue or red, that screams: Here I AM!! (hear me roar!!! haha)
    Attack me all you dare, I’m not afraid and I won’t go into hiding(wearing black or gray)

  46. Gorto, just remember there are a few of us “older” men who
    happen to “veterans” who are supporting Hillary. We voice
    our opinions here from time to time.

  47. kostner — I searched his site for organizing around the dinner. Saw another page for people in Illinois, but they had to pay for their own tickets to the dinner.

  48. This is so bloody embarrassing that we still cannot find Hillary’s speech last night except a 54 sec clip. What the hell is wrong?

  49. Hillary should wear a red white and blue croupier jacket in
    the debate in Las Vegas. It would be appropriate attire….
    She certainly wouldn’t go unrecognized…..

  50. Secret, Cspan will probably re-air the program tonight or
    the very least tomorrow morning before they go live at
    7 am eastern.

  51. Kegs, sorry my dear ‘old’ friend! 🙂

    But those word up there were not my own, I was simply quoting.
    I just remember those being the statistics from that poll.

    But I am most certainly glad to see you, and many others I’m certain, who are in ‘that’ group, supporting Hillary. 😀

  52. Kegs,
    I found it!! I found it!! Finally
    Thanks hwc
    I have to open Real player and cut and pasted his url in there and it worked
    Oh I am so bloody happy!
    Thank you so much

  53. Gorto, I know thay were not your words. In New Hampshire
    the “old” men will probably be a substantial part of the cross
    over vote. They have a history up there with blurring
    real candidate support. It is something to aware of…

  54. Impressions from the TV:

    A California friend and I watched it all last night and shared our reactions after each speech (by phone).

    My first reaction was after they were all introduced, Edwards and Obama hugged and went off the stage chatting and laughing with each other rather like two schoolboys who had written something naughty on her blackboard.

    Second, I thought Edwards’ speech was strong — sort of The Best of Edwards compilation but effective, esp. the line: if they don’t pass healthcare in 6 months, they will lose theirs! I don’t know how he could do that, but it sounded good.

    Biden was good, Dodd was ineffective because his voice is strong and he never modulates so it seemed like he was screaming throughout. Richardson was logical, even admirable, but not memorable or rousing.

    And then came Hillary! She spoke warmly, beautifully modulating her voice, convincingly, positively, and somewhere in there when she was talking about Democrats and what they stand for, she brought me to tears. I think that anyone who listened to her, had a sudden longing for the party and the America we were so proud of. She was convincing that we could turn this listing ship around and be better than before.

    (The thought that came to me was: How have we gone from the greatest generation who helped free the world from the Nazis and the fascists to a country quibbling about whether waterboarding is torture?? My family fled Poland where many relatives were tortured and killed and came here because we believed in America — and what we have become in the last few years makes me cry. I saw Hillary last night and knew that I had made the right choice. I see nobody more prepared or equipped to unleash the huge potential we have for change and to appoint the same competent, intelligent people as we had in the 90s to help her solve our many neglected metastasizing problems.)

    And finally, Obama. I listened closely but was forced to turn him off for a couple of minutes — it seemed interminable but I returned each time and I heard: “I….I…..I….I…..I…..I…..Iraq…..I..the only one.” Every sentence started with I followed by an inexplicable assertion. I don’t understand the logic of discontinuing the fights of the 90s. Health care? Tax fairness? What? I don’t understand why only O can bring both sides together. According to what he says or implies, if he is president, he wont be swiftboated and the red states will agree with the blue states and he will please them both because of his uniqueness.

    I have searched websites looking for an explanation of this talent and all I get is what he said today on MTP: I disagree with Hillary — always followed by her position, even down to some of her phrasing.

    The amazing one was his reiteration of “Hillary lies” followed by her position on Social Security, minus her insistence on fiscal responsibility. He did gulp when Russert said his tax could cost $5000 a year — and said well, I haven’t decided on how I will structure that.

    Question to Celiff: It was my friend’s impression that Obama got a much bigger reaction than Hillary. I thought that that was because they stayed on it longer because he was the last. What was your observation?

    Note to Hillary supporters: I am thrilled that people say that in Iowa, Hillary is not really ahead, etc. That makes the expectation game in her favor. If she doesn’t win, there is no big shock, and if she does, she is the BIG winner. Remember, Bill was “the comeback kid” in NH by coming in second! All because of the expectations game. So keep it close in Iowa, eke out a win in NH, and we will put her over in Nevada 🙂

  55. He was last, most were leaving, the media and cameras were right by his supporters, and they had young, college kids from Chicago, and apparently Maryland. Looking at the crowds, we were more diverse, larger and more energetic. We are the only group besides those eating on the floor that gave Senator Harkin a standing ovation. They did a stupid auction, let congress people speak, and Tom Harkin (who gave an awesome speech), so our supporters left as soon as Hillary left the room. They also had a lot of kids too young to vote for obama.

  56. Clinton still in Iowa today…

    Clinton: Go Slow on Social Security
    By MIKE GLOVER – 1 hour ago

    WATERLOO, Iowa (AP) — Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton marked Veterans Day by calling for new assistance programs, but said she would move more carefully than her rivals on dealing with looming shortfalls facing the Social Security system.

    Her move came as rival Barack Obama said he would lift the income ceiling on the Social Security tax. Currently, only the first $97,500 of a person’s annual income is taxed; the cap is scheduled to rise to $102,000 next year.

    “I know it may sound good at first blush,” said Clinton. “If you look at all the complexities of this, I think it’s much smarter to say: Look, we’re going to deal with the challenges by fiscal responsibility and we’re going to use a bipartisan commission. And we’re not going to do it by further burdening middle-class families.”

    In an interview Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Obama said increasing the income ceiling would allow relatively well-off taxpayers such as himself to pay a little more to rescue the system. Clinton rejected that argument.

    “If you lift the cap completely that would be a $1 trillion tax increase,” Clinton told reporters after a Veterans Day event.

    Clinton said she would initially end the practice of borrowing from the Social Security trust fund. She said more responsible fiscal practices could bolster the economy, which would in turn make the fund more healthy.

    Obama has accused Clinton of ducking on a crucial issue, and he made a veiled reference to that at a big fundraising dinner on Saturday.

    “The same old textbook campaigns just won’t do in this election,” Obama said. “That’s why not answering questions because we’re afraid our answer won’t be popular just won’t do.”

    “I think primary voters do know where I am,” said Clinton. “I am for solving the long-term challenges of the Social Security trust fund.”

    She rejected suggestions that there are a very limited number of potential solutions.

    “I don’t buy that,” said Clinton. “I think there are a lot of solutions with many variations.”

    Clinton used Veterans Day to trot out a package of assistance programs for veterans, and to tout the endorsement she’s gotten from a committee of more than 1,200 veterans.

    “She has been a terrific friend of the military,” said retired Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton. “She has been a terrific friend of veterans.”

    Clinton’s package would increase educational benefits, housing assistance and job training for veterans. While veterans currently get preferences for government jobs, Clinton said she would expand that to contractors who work for the government.

    “If they are being paid with taxpayer dollars, they should also hire veterans,” said Clinton

  57. Hello HillaryLandRocks & other folks,

    Very exciting. I just fired an email to Ben Smith at politico, and attached the link you provided… I got an immediate response from him saying ‘very interesting, Chicago’…. LOL. He was referring to Biden’s ‘Chicago’ dig…

    Here’s the official denial from Obama campaign… From ‘First Read’.

    DES MOINES, IA – Nearly one in three people at last night’s Jefferson-Jackson Dinner was an Obama supporter. The campaign brought 3,000 supporters to a dinner that had 9,000 attendees. They also made sure to have a representative from each of Iowa’s 99 counties in attendance.

    When asked if all of the Obama supporters attending the event were from Iowa, Obama’s Iowa Press Secretary Tommy Vietor said, “All of them. Except for my dad.”

  58. I am going to fire more emails to local Iowa reporters, and let’s do the same to embarrass Obama… He is a fraud.

  59. freckles: Question to Celiff: It was my friend’s impression that Obama got a much bigger reaction than Hillary.

    The Obama bunch got the best seating (center) and as celiff points out, the media was set up by them. That it came across as a bigger reaction was largely due to acoustics, I think. I believe the Hillary crowd also got split up into the sidearms of the U-shape.

  60. kostner,

    I’m sure he’d say that announcements to the contrary were a ‘boneheaded staff move’ or some such, but reading the Maryland announcement, I’d expect to be attending the dinner, and reading the Illinois one, it’s clearly an option if you pay for the ticket.

  61. I don’t know, someone said the diners had to pay and be from Iowa, but they were inviting supporters for like a rally.

  62. “(AP) – …looming shortfalls facing the Social Security system.”

    What looming shortfalls ?

    Social Security is more financially sound today than it has been throughout most of its 71-year history.

  63. The people on the floor were from Iowa, except for Tim Russert and the media. The supporters were from out of state, no question. And Hillarylandrocks is right, acoustics played a big role in their proximity to the cameras. You had to be there.

  64. A ticket was needed to sit in the bleachers. Why has a notice saying that buying a ticket is an option for IL residents is unknown to me …

  65. Can we please stop with the bussing supporters themes? Who cares?

    What’s important and what we should be talking about is Hillary’s message last night:

    “I am not interested in attacking my opponents. I am interested in attacking the problems facing America!’

  66. Can we please stop with the bussing supporters themes? Who cares?

    I do. It’s hardly an “attack” — it’s an assessment of ground strength in IA.

  67. mj — the entire point of the dinner is to show off IA organization. They showed their hands. Whether this truly reflects level of organization vs smoke and mirrors to intimidate is a valid line of inquiry.

  68. I’m not interested in the Georgetown set/finger bowls, yet it’s something others find interesting.

  69. hey hillfans, the 2 new polls coming out of nh are not as dramatic as the nutkooks said it would be. listening to them you would have thought obama was neck and neck with hillary or ahead.

  70. I think the bussing in thing is a very troubling thing, but I also think that her message is what will resonate here in Iowa. She has focused on attacking America’s problems and the republicans, not her fellow democrats, who have sunk to the level where they are bringing in out of staters.

  71. celiff —

    Everywhere, people discount Obama’s ability to bring out the youth vote. I don’t. I live in a university area where last Nov, youth turnout went thru the roof due to organization by local Dems. Frankly, if he *really* was able to bring in 3,000 mostly young caucus-goers to DM from all over the state, I’m impressed. If it was padded, I’m relieved.

  72. Admin, Thanks so much for your thoughts above. Good advice for all. I continue to be impressed with the quality of Hillary’s campaign. Last night – her speech was incredible. She’s always had the ability to give a great speech, but I felt last night everything she said and how she said it were just spot on. She outlined what is so basic about being a democrat. And what motivates her to work for change. I so appreciate her emphasis on being united against the republicans and on not attacking others. As I work to support her in my area, I am goin’ to remember this and just focus on gettin’ more and more people out. I do appreciate all the hard work others are doin’ around this country to grow her support wider and deeper. It’s gonna be a long one, but we can do it, y’all. We are lucky to have such a great candidate. mollyj

  73. I wish she would come to campus. It would help so much. She and Bill came on campus, but it was during the summer, so few kids were here. She would on the downside have to deal with dirty hippy protesters here, and there are plenty. Maybe come to a game, basketball just started up and football has one game left. She has to come here, it is vital.

  74. At least send Bill. We need star power for this age group. Her, Bill, or maybe Magic Johnson should come to a basketball game.

  75. Oh, and Hillarylandrocks, you are right. This county saw the largest youth vote turnout ever last week. The year before was the highest, the midterms, but it was broken this year. We are getting more involved, and I think her coming to IC would help immensly. She has been to ISU, but not UI, during school.

  76. I recently spoke to an Iowan who told me that Hillary visited Luther College in Decorah last April – that was a long time ago.

  77. celiff — turnout was so high that we’ve requested more voting machines at the university precincts as well as for surrounding areas where students live. You guys are making yourselves heard. Range of issues — on the local level it’s stuff like student housing; statewide/national it’s issues like student loan burdens, tuition costs, quality-of-life post-degree, etc. I’ve also seen a rise in interest in student clubs/politics since I graduated (about 7 yrs ago).

    That’s why Obama is stressing ‘fixing’ social security and generational conflict — he wants the older vote to split between Edwards/Hill in IA. I read a DK diary about a week ago that claimed his campaign has been to one third of the high schools in the state to recruit 17-yr olds.

    One thing I’m wondering … if he continues to push this generational argument, will this drive turnout for the 45+ group? Where I live, any hint of 17 yr olds driving an outcome would get the seniors out in droves, LOL.

    Of course, Hillary doesn’t need a majority in this demo, just a decent chunk.

  78. I think she needs to start on focusing on debate coming this Thursday. This will be the ONLY big thing that will be regurgitated by press for next month, and after december 10th, it really doesnt matter, because of holiday season.

    Obama has given away his strategy. He will keep up talking points on social security and immigration. Immigration is BIG problem in Nevada. Wolf Blitzer will undoubtedly question her and other candidates. She needs to tear her opponents on both the issues, despite being seen as attacking republicans. It is these subtle shots that will shut Obama and Edwards up. Dodd and Biden are noise, and they will not attack her all that much because it wont help them much.

    Edwards is also noise at this point, but he can wait. Obama HAS to be attacked on two issues, which he is touting as inconsistencies in Clintons approach. Social Security and Immigration.

    Social security : she needs to tear out Mr. Obama’s rhetoric on this issue. I am tired of this. She needs to point out that experts on both sides of isle like Alan Greenspan acknowledge that social security is not in crisis and needs to ask what makes him believe that it is crisis. She needs to put a value on the number of additional years raising cap to 102K would help based on projections, and has to demonstrate with clear numbers that his is a short term plan with minimal impact, yet increasing significant taxes on middle/upper middle class and small businesses. she needs to cite some expert on that talking point. she NEEDS to point out how she has fought tooth and neck to salvage social security when republicans were running amok trying to privatize it. and tell him three or four examples of how it can be salvaged, but only after fiscal discipline and balance is achieved and on a bipartisan basis.

    Immigration : she NEEDS to point out her stance very rigorously. wolf will pull up some dirt from previous interviews of both bill and herself on this issue. she needs to look into all her previous major headlines in this regard. she needs to slam Obama saying that he is misrepresenting her statements.

    she has to be sharp in this debate and be a little more aggressive, so that others dont pile on onto her. Pakistan will be an issue, and Clinton has to point out Obama’s statements and how they caused flags burning in Pakistan. She has to say his statements were irresponsible, any talk of attacking a sovereign country especially a nuclear armed state, is extremely dangerous and detrimental to international relations. She has to go a step further than just calling him naive, so that his mask on inexperience is exposed.

    Last thing, she should NOT go out of her way to defend herself. What hurt her in previous debate was not her first statement but trying to defend herself after what Senator Dodd has said. She is not extremely impromptu, she is a thoughtful and methodical person. So unless moderator asks her to defend herself, which would give her time to think through her response, she should not defend herself.

    She has to keep smiling and in fact go a step ahead and give sense of exasperation once or twice when these guys repeat the same talking points. The exasperation tactic would be a “There you go again” in their faces. No body cares about substance of the debate. Its all how it comes across on TV. George Bush won the debates on Kerry not by talking substance, but by outsmarting him in personality. fact check post debate was soo much bull, but his ratings improved substantially after debates. I hope she or her campaign take notice of some of these issues.

  79. I think Biden has the edge on Pakistan because he is in talks with the two leaders. If I were her, I would actually say I like Biden’s idea’s on Pakistan. She doesn’t need to have all the right answers, she just has to listen to them.

  80. With college crowd, bill is far better speaker to fire up college students. Now she has got the theme of “turn up the heat” too, so that would fire up more of the students. I think she needs to use him more regularly especially on college campuses. Both of them attending colleges will seal the deal in my opinion. In my school, people LOVE Bill, irrespective of weather they support Obama or Hillary. So, that strategy will definitely help drive throngs of college crowd towards Hillary. The young people have very little idea about wars during Bill clinton presidency (except few political junkies), but they very well know that he saw through biggest economy boom in modern american history. recently I was talking about a friend of mine who is very apolotical but he said he will vote this year for hillary, because “clintons in whitehouse is like music to his ears”. 🙂

  81. I do think Hill can rev up any crowd though. I saw her in person aand everyone was pschyed, young and old. She was great. The young girls especially loved her. They all dressed up for the event in summer dresses with their Hillary stickers. It was really nice.

  82. Per Politico, should we turn up the head on O-bomb??

    Obama records requests prove fruitless

    Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) dodged questions Sunday about releasing papers from his eight years as an Illinois state senator, and his campaign has not answered records requests from the state’s two largest newspapers.

    Obama’s campaign has prodded Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) to make available additional records of her actions during her husband’s presidency.

    The papers were an issue in the last presidential debate, and the Republican National Committee has kept up a near-daily drumbeat demanding their release.

    On Nov. 3, the Obama campaign sent out a letter from two leaders of his Iowa campaign, pressing Clinton to release her White House schedules before the Iowa caucuses.

    “Fully releasing these records is in keeping with the spirit of the process that makes the Iowa caucus so special,” the letter says.

    But two Chicago newspapers have said the Obama campaign has not responded to their requests for comparable papers from his career.

    On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” moderator Tim Russert asked Obama about the papers from his state legislative days, from 1997 to 2004.

    Obama first said, “We did not keep those records.”

    He then elaborated: “Well, let’s be clear.

    “In the state senate, every single piece of information, every document related to state government was kept by the state of Illinois and has been disclosed and is available and has been gone through with a fine-toothed comb by news outlets in Illinois.

    “The stuff that I did not keep has to do with, for example, my schedule. I didn’t have a schedule. I was a state senator. I wasn’t intending to have the Barack Obama State Senate Library. I didn’t have 50 or 500 people to, to help me archive these issues.”

    Illinois has no central repository for the personal records of its legislators.

    On Friday, Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun-Times reported that she had asked Obama at a news conference: “Do your state senate papers still exist? If they do, just where are they? And would you ever intend to make them public to be responsive to some requests?”

    Sweet wrote that he replied: “Nobody has requested specific documents.”

    But the Chicago Tribune has reported that it “requested documents from his time in Springfield and never received a response.”

    And Sweet wrote of her own paper, “The Chicago Sun-Times has also been asking about Obama’s papers.”

    Russert pressed Obama, who has touted his service in Springfield as proof of his experience, about his records of meetings with lobbyists.

    “I did not have a scheduler, but, as I said, every document related to my interactions with government is available right now,” Obama said. “And, as I said, news outlets have already looked at them.”

    Asked by Russert if he would commit to publishing his schedule each day, as his colleague Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), does, Obama said: “Well, you know, these days I have a public presidential schedule that I think everybody has access to.”

    Danny Diaz of the Republican National Committee said of Obama’s reticence on records: “Barack Obama is a rookie senator with few accomplishments. Perhaps he’s reluctant to inform the public about his activities in Springfield because they demonstrate a lack of leadership at a state level as well.”

    Obama’s campaign declined repeated requests from Politico for comment on the issue, with officials saying only that they had been ahead of the curve on transparency by releasing Obama’s tax return (albeit without attachments) and publishing details of the budget earmarks Obama has requested.

  83. What I learned last night is that she is a tough broad. She’s always so elegant and cool that I don’t think I really understood just how tough she is. Now, I knew she was a fighter, but I really understand now the degree to which a bare knuckle street brawl is right up her alley. Now it’s true she’s smooth enough to hold her own in any room, but I bet she and Bo Diddley will get along just fine too.

    About half way through the evening, my husband shook his head and said, “I’m getting myself a bumper sticker that says, I”m voting for the broad.” 🙂

    I’m so glad I watched the dinner last night. Living in LA, we don’t get to see a lot of the stump speeches. It was really great seeing her in action.

    Polls are gonna get tighter, but she’s going to be fine. No one has presented anywhere near the vision she has.

  84. A more journalistic assessment from Bloomberg

    Hillary Clinton Touts Electability, Attacks Republicans in Iowa

    By Kim Chipman

    Nov. 11 (Bloomberg) — Democratic presidential hopefuls Barack Obama and John Edwards took aim at frontrunner Hillary Clinton in Iowa yesterday while the former first lady sought to stay above the fray by focusing her criticism on Republicans and touting herself as the most electable candidate.

    “I’m not interested in attacking my opponents,” New York Senator Clinton, 60, said yesterday in Des Moines at the annual Jefferson-Jackson Dinner, a fundraiser for the Iowa Democratic Party. “We should be turning up the heat on the Republicans.”

    With the Iowa caucuses less than two months away, Illinois Senator Obama and former North Carolina Senator Edwards have stepped up attacks on Clinton, who tops national polls and is vying for the lead in Iowa. While Obama didn’t mention her by name, he was the most aggressive in going after Clinton.

    “The same old Washington textbook campaigns just won’t do it in this election,” Obama, 46, said. “Not answering questions because we are afraid our answers won’t be popular just won’t do it.”

    Clinton stumbled in an Oct. 30 debate when she was asked about New York Governor Eliot Spitzer’s plan to make driver’s licenses available to illegal immigrants. Clinton gave conflicting answers, concluding that while she doesn’t formally endorse the plan, it “makes a lot of sense.” She later acknowledged that she wasn’t at her “best” during the forum.

    Edwards, 54, also took some jabs at Clinton yesterday by emphasizing what he says is the corrupting influence of Washington lobbyists on politics.

    `Corporate Money’

    “Washington is awash with corporate money,” he said at yesterday’s dinner, which attracted a record crowd of more than 9,000. “With lobbyists who pass it out, with politicians who ask for it.”

    Edwards has previously criticized Clinton for her acceptance of campaign funds from lobbyists. Last month, he contended that a Clinton presidency would establish a “corruption machine.”

    At least one political observer gave Clinton high marks for her speech last night.

    “Clinton was very, very good,” said Charlie Cook, independent analyst and publisher of the Cook Political Report in Washington. “She’s had a tough 10 days or so, I think she turned in the performance she needed.”

    Clinton touted support she’s received from Democratic leaders in Republican-leaning states such as Arkansas who “know that I can win.” She also noted the endorsement she won last week from Ohio Governor Ted Strickland.

    “Democrats know when we win Ohio, we win the White House,” she said.

    January Caucus

    Still, Clinton said she’s also prepared for a tough fight as the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses draw near.

    “I know as the campaign goes on, it’s going to get a little hotter out there, but that’s fine by me,” Clinton said. “As Harry Truman said, if you can’t stand the heat get out of the kitchen, and I’ll tell you what, I feel really comfortable in the kitchen.”

    Clinton called on Democrats to fight harder to champion civil rights, combat climate change and end the war in Iraq. On cue, her supporters chanted the refrain “turn up the heat.”

    Obama had a similarly enthusiastic crowd, as did Edwards.

    All the campaigns sought to fill the Des Moines stadium where the event took place with their own backers. Guests paid between $20 and several thousand dollars to attend.

    “It’s a chance for the candidates to be seen as really being carried along a wave of enthusiastic support,” said Dennis Goldford, a politics professor at Drake University in Des Moines.

    Six Candidates

    The six presidential hopefuls, who also included New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, Senator Chris Dodd of Connecticut and Senator Joe Biden of Delaware, spoke directly to the Iowa crowd with no interruptions from a moderator. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California was emcee of the dinner.

    While Clinton has huge leads in national polls among all voters and in many states throughout the U.S., it’s a different story in Iowa. The state features a close contest between Clinton, Obama and Edwards.

    “It’s essentially a three-person race,” Goldford said. “But a lot can happen in eight weeks.”

    To contact the reporter on this story: Kim Chipman in Washington at .


    Looking at Clinton,
    Seeing Themselves
    Executive Women Identify
    With the Scrutiny She’s Facing
    November 12, 2007

    When Valerie Frederickson, a Silicon Valley human-resources consultant, heard Hillary Clinton assert that she could “take the heat” after getting pummeled by opponents in a recent debate, she recalled the times in her own career when a roomful of men disrespected her.

    Once, at a national sales meeting for a large construction-products company, a male colleague passed around photographs of her in a bikini that he’d secretly taken on a prior business trip. “Instead of quitting, I focused on being better, on outselling the guys three-to-one,” says Ms. Frederickson, who later founded her own firm, Valerie Frederickson & Co.

    Ms. Frederickson has donated money to John Edwards’s campaign, because she thinks he has a better chance of winning, but she’ll vote for Mrs. Clinton if she’s the Democratic candidate. She identifies with Mrs. Clinton’s determination “to pick herself up when she’s shot down and figure out how to be effective.” And, she notes, “As professional women we’ve been through so much — I feel like she’s my big sister.”
    A year away from the election, Mrs. Clinton, the Democratic front-runner, has a lead with women voters over male candidates of both parties. A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll shows that when matched against Republican Rudolph Giuliani, she wins by 53% to 38% among female voters (and loses among men by 52% to 38%.) Against Democrat Sen. Barack Obama, she wins among women by 53% to 21%, while winning among men by just 37% to 31%.

    Not all women are certain that Mrs. Clinton is going to be the one to shatter what’s been called “the last glass ceiling.” Executive and professional women with incomes over $75,000 — who might be perceived as having most in common with her — support Mrs. Clinton in much lower numbers than do lower-income women, and they are slightly more likely to vote for Mr. Giuliani than for her: 46% to 45%.

    But regardless of their political views and preferences, Mrs. Clinton’s campaign is stirring strong feelings among female executives about what it means to be a woman — often the only woman — seeking a position of power. Whether she is battling male opponents in debates, having her hair and clothing scrutinized or trying to convince voters she is strong enough to do tough tasks, the senator is publicly facing challenges that most female executives have grappled with privately throughout their careers. Her determination to win the White House is also prompting many women in business to reflect on their career goals and what price they’re willing to pay to achieve them.

    “She’s standing up there and taking all these arrows I identify with, even if she doesn’t represent exactly what I might want for a presidential candidate,” says Pat Cook, head of Cook & Co., a Bronxville, N.Y., executive-search firm who is still undecided.

    And politics is an even tougher arena than business because “you have to win or lose in public, and you’re always under the cameras,” says Ruth Mandel at Rutgers University’s Center for American Women and Politics.

    Sandra Peterson, president of Bayer AG’s Bayer HealthCare Diabetes Care and executive vice president of Bayer HealthCare, agrees that “it’s hard not to identify with some of what Hillary Clinton is up against,” although she’s still an undecided voter. When Mrs. Clinton was criticized in a newspaper column for showing some cleavage on the Senate floor this summer, Ms. Peterson recalled the barrage of sexually suggestive “Animal House” remarks leveled at her when she began her career some 20 years ago at the American Stock Exchange.

    Today, women are treated more equally. Thousands are managers in charge of employees and multibillion-dollar businesses. But their numbers drastically dwindle in higher offices, with women occupying just 16% of senior corporate jobs and about one-sixth of boardroom seats. Those numbers are similar to those in the public sector, where women now hold 16% of seats in both the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, and 24% of statewide elected offices. Nine of the 50 state governors are female.

    The numbers don’t hint at the daily struggles women face in business and politics. “There’s still a narrower band of acceptable behavior for women than men,” Ms. Peterson says. “The minute Hillary steps out of line, everyone jumps all over her,” she adds. Missteps can include just laughing too loudly or showing a bit of cleavage.

    “It makes my blood boil,” says DeeDee Towery, president and CEO of ProActive Business Solutions, an Oakland, Calif., IT company. She says she gets so angry when she hears Mrs. Clinton attacked about her behavior that she avoids listening to the news. “It reminds me of being told by my father when I was growing up that business was for men and women belonged at home,” says Ms. Towery, who is a supporter of Mrs. Clinton.

    Catalyst, the women’s research organization, has found that women face “an impossible double bind” when they seek leadership jobs. When they act in stereotypical feminine ways — showing “caring and concern for others” — they’re judged less competent, a recent survey of more than 1,200 female executives found. Yet, if they’re “assertive,” they’re judged in performance reviews as “too tough.”

    In addition, the study found that women have to prove over and over again that they’re competent. And they rarely are perceived as both competent and likable. “We’re watching this double-bind play out before our eyes on the campaign trail,” says Ilene H. Lang, president of Catalyst.

    Yet “playing the gender card” — or complaining that they’ve been attacked, held back or discriminated against because they are women — only makes matters worse, many women say. “Sure there’s still discrimination, but [women] have to figure out a way to get around and beyond it,” says Kay Koplovitz, chairman of Liz Claiborne Inc. and a Mrs. Clinton backer. “If you pull the gender card, you just diminish your strength as a leader.”

    Following Mrs. Clinton’s rocky showing in a debate with six opponents in Philadelphia two weeks ago, one of her strategists complained there had been a piling on against her — implying indirectly that her male rivals were beating up on the sole woman in the race. But within a few days, after a denial by Sen. Obama and criticism from several political columnists that she was playing victim, Mrs. Clinton corrected that impression. “I don’t think they’re picking on me because I’m a woman; I think they’re picking on me because I’m winning,” she said at a news conference at the Capitol after filing papers to run in the New Hampshire primary.

    Then she added, in a reversal of a famous remark she once made about how she did not want to stay home and bake cookies: “I anticipate it’s going to get even hotter — and if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. And I’m very much at home in the kitchen.”

    Other executive women say they’ve also learned to distinguish between sexist remarks and tough criticism about their job performance — and to accept that there are times when they’ll be judged differently than men.

    If you’re a woman leader and you’re giving a speech or being interviewed by the media, “you are bound to be asked personal questions, such as how you balance work and family, or where you got your shoes,” says Cathie Black, president of Hearst Magazines, a division of Hearst Corp., and author of “Basic Black: The Essential Guide for Getting Ahead at Work (and in Life).”

    “It comes with the territory, and I don’t think railing about it gets you anywhere,” she adds. Her personal strategy, she says, is to “accept it,” answer a few questions, and then say firmly, “OK, that’s enough; let’s move on.”

    It’s the same in politics, Ms. Black says, where a woman will have to convince voters she’s the best candidate, rather than try to seek sympathy if she is attacked. “To run, you need tremendous fortitude, not just for one day but every day for 18 months, and you have to handle the daily battles,” says Ms. Black, who hasn’t decided whom she will back.

    Indeed, some of the most successful women in business say they’ve learned to stop worrying so much about gender and to focus on leading. “The successful women I know in business, academia and elsewhere think of themselves as leaders who happen to be women” not as female executives, female college presidents or female politicians, says Nancy Koehn, a Harvard Business School professor.

    The real challenge, of course, is to get everyone else to think of them that way as well.
    • Email me at Join a discussion about how women are viewed in the public eye, at To see past columns, go to

  86. gladiatorstail: Could you clarify what you mean by Hill going after the others on immigration?

    Speaking of NV, she’s getting a huge endorsement from state senator Ruben Kihuen. The candidates auditioned for his endorsement.

    Kihuen is known for his dogged organizing, energy and close ties to his constituents. His support was sought by each of the Democratic candidates wanting to show strength among Hispanic voters here, many of whom also are union members.

    basement angel: Is it b/c I’m not a daily reader or is the LA Times pretty negative with its Hillary coverage?

  87. Seems that The Politico has identified what we already know:

    Edwards, Obama: The enemy of my enemy …
    By: Ben Smith
    November 11, 2007 10:06 PM EST

    They switched on the lights in the bar at the Hotel Fort Des Moines at 2:00 a.m. Sunday, and a crowd of two dozen buoyant young field organizers for Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) spilled out onto the sidewalk, some jostling past Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, Terry McAuliffe, who had paused for a moment just inside the hotel’s glass doors.

    The organizers were men and women in their 20s, and all dressed identically: jeans and red T-shirts with Obama’s logo and his call to arms, “Fire it up.”

    When a man on the edge of the group yelled the slogan, they answered with the response they’d been chanting all night: “Ready to go.”

    “Fire it up!” the rumpled, older man yelled again.

    “Ready to go!” the crowd shouted back again. “Fire it up!” he called. “Ready to go!”

    “Let’s kick her ass,” the cheerleader finally called out, and the crowd roared.

    The cheerleader — Joe Trippi, chief adviser to Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Obama’s rival John Edwards, new-politics guru, and all-around mischief maker — glanced gleefully over at McAuliffe.

    Trippi had been the subject all week of paranoid rumors on liberal blogs that he was a kind of political double agent, an “Obama plant” in the Edwards fold.

    There is no evidence of that, but his mischievous role outside the hotel did reveal what has emerged as a central dynamic of the frantic battle to knock Hillary Clinton off her perch in Iowa:

    The Obama and Edwards campaigns have come to view each other — warily on Obama’s side, more warmly on Edwards’ — as arms-length allies against her.

    “The differences between Sen. Clinton and myself are much more dramatic than the differences between Sen. Obama and myself,” Edwards, a former North Carolina senator, said last Thursday in Des Moines.

    Asked whether they were teaming up on Clinton, the campaigns’ spokesmen offered blunt denials.

    “Sen. Obama has a singular goal in this race — to win the Democratic nomination so we can get to the work of transforming this nation,” said Obama spokesman Bill Burton.

    “No, John Edwards is fighting to win the White House so he can get this government working for regular people again,” said Edwards spokesman Mark Kornblau.

    The shared tactical goals of the Edwards and Obama campaign fall far short, at the moment, of the true coordination between Sen. John F. Kerry and Rep. Dick Gephardt in 2004, when — former staffers of both campaigns say — aides to the campaigns secretly coordinated their attacks on the insurgent Howard Dean.

    There’s no evidence of actual behind-the-scenes links between the Obama and Edwards campaigns, and while their attacks on Clinton reinforce one another, they also fly from differing, and sometimes contradictory, perspectives.

    Still, at Saturday night’s Jefferson Jackson dinner, their messages seemed to echo one another.

    Obama criticized Clinton for her alleged divisiveness and lack of principle, Edwards for her ties to a “corrupt” establishment.

    And both dismissed the notion of the Clinton 1990s as a Democratic Golden Age, with Edwards fitting that period into his narrative of corporate control, and Obama recalling its polarization.

    More broadly, both seek to cast Clinton as a symbol of the status quo, as they offer voters two different visions of change.

    (It’s an argument Clinton sharply contests, and that she’s hoping voters will reject: “There are some who will say they don’t know where I stand,” she said dismissively Saturday night, adding: “I stand where I have stood for 35 years — I stand with you and with your children and with every American who needs a fighter in their corner for a better life.”)

    There remain sharp differences between the two challengers.

    Obama, who seeks to portray himself as alone in a head-to-head contest with Clinton, has jabbed occasionally at Edwards’ support for the war and what Obama’s advisors consider to be Edwards’ leftward shift from a relatively moderate record in the United States Senate.

    “John wasn’t this raging populist four years ago,” Obama told The Washington Post, adding a more personal shot at his rival’s career as “a trial lawyer making millions of dollars.”

    Edwards, meanwhile, casts Obama as well-intentioned but insufficiently combative.

    The theme of his speech at the Des Moines dinner was that he — like Obama — would “give America hope,” but that he — unlike Obama — would also “give … hell” to the enemies of progressive policies.

    Tellingly, though, both campaigns moved quickly to paper over the rift that emerged from Obama’s Post interview late in the week.

    Edwards responded with his comments about how much the two have in common. Asked again on Sunday, he defended Obama, saying he’d been asked a misleading question.

    Obama’s communications director, Robert Gibbs, refused to respond in any way to questions about how or if the two men are aligned.

    “Just not something we’re interested in commenting on,” he e-mailed.

    But Trippi, for his part, an hour after his performance in front of staffers for all three campaigns and several reporters, urged perhaps a bit too much that this reporter not write about the scene, virtually guaranteeing it would see print.

    But Trippi’s cheer came just hours after the Jefferson Jackson dinner, and seemed to echo its conclusion.

    As the event ended, the six candidates took the stage to an upbeat Bon Jovi tune.

    Edwards and Obama shook hands, embraced and talked while, on the very edge of the stage, Clinton stood for a moment alone, clapping her hands to the music.

  88. That article about women seemed biased against Hillary. For Pete’s sake, she didn’t play the gender card. She doesn’t need guidence from these ladies.

  89. Ms. Frederickson has donated money to John Edwards’s campaign, because she thinks he has a better chance of winning

    I wonder what Ms. Frederickson bases this on.

  90. Teresa Vilmain is amazing. She is very energetic and she has to be. And I agree that any hint of young people turning out to vote usually gets older people to come out too. This doesn’t work in a huge college town like Iowa City, but it should in places like Davenport, Des Moines, and Cedar Rapids.

  91. I have talked to Alita Black, a personal friend of Hillary’s who works on human rights at GWU, and I have spoken with Emily Hawkins, the Students For Hillary National Chair. I think talking with Vilmain would be an excellent idea. I hope she confirms to coming on the 8th. We are having a students issues forum with ABC news and all of them are invited. It is on the same day as Rep. Dave Loebsack’s birthday fundraiser up the way in Cedar Rapids, and we are coordinating with the Loebsack people so that the candidates can come to our forum, and then go to his fundraiser.

  92. Well, you tell them that your friends on this site would love to discuss it all day with you if she comes. We are routing for you, Celiff.

  93. People, who is Grover Norquist? According to a news article from the UK, Norquist want to introduce a constitutional amendment that prohibits family members from running for President. This is to prevent Bill/Hillary type situations in the future. He is described in the article as “one of America’s most influential Republican activists”. He sounds like a right wing nutjob to me. I’ve never heard his name before…

  94. During the Russert interview, Obama confirmed that he has a high regard for Senator Clinton and that she is electable. But when Russert suggested his position on policy issues like Iran and Social Security was really no different than hers, Obama offered what could be described as a sleight of hand explanation. Thus, I am happy to see that his little magic act is fully exposed in the Hillary Hub Fact Check.

  95. AG — big-time radical right organizer; he’s the ‘drown govt in a bathtub’ guy. He’s probably terrified that the success of Clintonism will interfere with his dreams of an enduring conservative majority. Democrats should pause and think about why Norquist really wants to make this a campaign issue. After all, the presidency is an elected office, not an inherited one.

    I went to read the article you mentioned. Interesting to see how this is dovetailing w/ Obama’s strategy to get Republicans to cross over and vote for him in the Dem primary. Anyone who believes that Republicans will continue their love affair post-primary is a fool.

  96. AmericanGal, go to google–wikopedia and you will find out more than you ever wanted to know about Grover Norquist. He is a neocon, a true believer in open borders, no taxes or safety nets. He worked for National Taxpayers Union under James Dale Davidson (The Great Reckoning). When Bush was awarded the Presidency Norquist acquired instant access and influence. He once said he favors tax cuts as a way to defund the left, etc. Thus, anything he might propose as a Constitutional amendment would be highly partisan and suspect in my opinion.

  97. the discussion on the blog i read, said he was doing it to coincide with the possible race with hrc in the general election, it would be important to bring home the idea that they shouldnt vote for her.

  98. Oh my gosh, I just read the second article. It wasn’t up earlier. I couldn’t see it. So this guy is taunting that these two losers are ganging up together on Hillary? Wow. Pathetic.

  99. These guys are such losers. They can’t beat Hillary on her own. Oh my. Are Dodd and Richardson in on this as well? Well, probably not Richardson, but who knows? They did pull that silly michigan stunt.

  100. Celiff, is this true?

    “Hey lori, you know that 5,000 Obama supporters showed up? 2,000 of them were from out of state, so they stayed outside. 3,000 of them were from Iowa, much more than Hillary had and she allowed her of staters to come in.”

  101. so here is a concern of mine-I have read somewhere that one only has to be in iowa like 10 days to caucus! or si it 3? Im totally confused and worry about our opponenets using this! let me know

  102. As TAYLOR MARSH reminds us…………

    HILLARY was never supposed to win IOWA…..IF she eeks out a victory there, its just a bonus.

    Come FEB 5th Clinton will be declared the winner.

  103. Just saw a few minutes ago on “Morning Jowl” that MSNBC is carrying Obama’s water again. A Mika interview with Michelle Obama airs tomorrow. Also, Mika said the studio strike means that her dad, ZBig, won’t be able to appear with Jon Stewart tomorrow, and she was sooo looking forward to seeing that. ZBig, is, as you know, a key Obama foreign policy advisor.

  104. Recent Obama Des Moines, Iowa, meetups (DSM Precinct 46-50 & others?) haven’t exactly been overwhelmingly attended.

    And compare the Cedar Rapids meetup groups – Ron Paul 82 members, Edwards 42, Obama 0; Iowa City meetup groups – Ron Paul 114 members, Edwards 43, Obama 0; Mount Pleasant – Obama 2; and Washington – Ron Paul 11, Obama 0.

    On 11/3, about 250 people went to Iowa(

    However, the St. Louis office didn’t open until 11/7 with 22 members – “one of the early cities to get an office” (

    From Daily Kos – Obama canvassing in NH 11/16 to 11/18 – with DC area canvassers (what about the NH canvassers? running thin?)

    – Road Trip to NH for Obama – SPACE AVAILABLE! 11/16 – 11/18
    DC for Obama is organizing another trip to canvass in New Hampshire. Currently, we have three carpools committed and soft commitments from about 10 people. We intend to work hard & have a lot of fun in the process. We especially need drivers and automobiles. We plan on sharing expenses for gas. Food is on your own.

    We plan to leave DC the morning of Friday, 11/16, probably at different times. We will arrive in NH Friday night. We will work, mostly door-to-door canvassing, on Saturday 11/17 and perhaps the morning of the 18th. Hopefully there will be campaign events in New Hampshire too. Limited floor/couch housing may be provided by the Campaign. Some of us are also planning to share very reasonably priced motel rooms, at our expense. We will arrive back in DC the evening of Sunday, 11/18. Interested?

  105. I don’t know what to make of the media.
    Are they looking for a horse race that badly, or are they looking to elect a republican?

    Cause that is surely what will happen if they keep pushing for Obama as the nominee.

    And I’m disgusted by those stories of Edwards and Obama, although it sadly doesn’t surprise me. I just hope the media will get their act together and find out what is going on, and expose them.

  106. Great post today by Taylor Marsh: “Obama is NOT the Anti-Hillary”

    Anyone thinking Mr. Obama is the anti-Hillary, so to speak, needs to pay attention and find another candidate. Quickly. This guy is so far off the Democratic party reservation I don’t know where he’s planting his primary flag, but it’s nowhere a progressive Democrat or our party should willingly go.

    It’s bad enough that Mr. Obama continues to use wingnut talking points on Social Security. My friend Dave Johnson said it well yesterday: Senator Obama, Please Stop Echoing Right-Wing Lies About Social Security! Paul Krugman asked nicely, Why, Barack, Why?, then took him out.

    Read the rest:

  107. Just finished watching Hillarys speech at the JJ dinner. And she rocked!!

    I couldn’t bring myself to watch Obama or the others, so I don’t know how their speeches went.
    But I will say that Hillary does good when she speaks low, almost whispering. As mentioned by others, she held the room captive when speaking about the invisible people, and that 18 year old dying.

    With so many people calling her shrill, which I don’t agree with, I like her voice as I’ve stated before 😉 but some people grasping for straws picks on her voice and laughter, she does good when speaking like this. It was great to watch, now I just wish I could download the whole speech somewhere. 😀


    Taylor Marsh with both barrels blasting…

    “Somebody hand me a towel, because I’m starting to sweat for him.

    A first lady must immediately produce her private conversations with her president husband, which Bill Clinton has already requested even though they can stay private for 12 years by law, but a state lawmaker whose only real experience is being a state lawmaker threw his records away and that’s okay.

    Here’s the up shot, folks. If you are a Hillary hater there’s one candidate who isn’t the anti Hillary. His name is Barack Obama. So if you’re in his camp and you think he’s got the answers, I suggest you check your idolatry, because this guy isn’t about Democratic ideology, that’s for sure, which I told you months ago. He’s a deal maker, first, last and on the bottom line. Social Security is in “crisis,” according to Mr. Obama, nod to the Republicans, but don’t forget that wink. Yeah, and fairy dust will keep Iran from screwing around in Iraq, too.”

  109. Clinton plays rescuer, not victim, in political melodrama
    By Susan Faludi
    Article Launched: 11/12/2007 01:37:36 AM PST

    No sooner had Hillary Clinton proceeded from the Democratic presidential debate to a speech at Wellesley College last week than the wailing began. Barack Obama hit the “Today” show accusing her of playing the gender card, and a chorus line of media pundits denounced her for having hurt the cause of feminism by acting the part of the injured girl.

    New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd contended that Clinton was trying to show “she can break, just like a little girl. . . . If she could become a senator by playing the victim after Monica, surely she can become president by playing the victim now.”

    Fox News’ Mort Kondracke preached: “I think it is very unattractive for a general election candidate, who wants to be the commander in chief of the free world, to be saying, ‘They’re ganging up on me!’ I mean, this is the NFL. This is not Wellesley vs. Smith in field hockey.”

    Yet these indictments were conjured from the slimmest of evidence. What Clinton actually said at her alma mater before a whooping and roaring crowd of more than 1,000 young women was: “In so many ways, this all-women’s college prepared me to compete in the all-boys’ club of presidential politics. . . . Fear is always with us, but we just don’t have time for it, not now. So let’s roll up our sleeves and get to work together. We’re ready to shatter that highest glass ceiling.”

    What about that was so girl-with-her-finger-in-her-mouth frail?

    The fact is, Clinton’s opponents are mad
    because they feel robbed. Clinton hadn’t acted the victim. The gender card she played was the one every successful recent male presidential candidate has played – the rescuer card.

    Keep in mind: The gender card is always played. It’s even played in presidential campaigns in which the candidates are all men, and (given our political culture and our history) it usually involves a morality tale in which men are the rescuers and women the victims in need of rescuing.

    Bill Clinton understood the power of that formula when he showcased his boyhood efforts to “stand up” to his abusive stepfather and shield his mother from blows.

    When facing George H.W. Bush, Democratic presidential candidate Michael Dukakis learned this lesson too late, after he failed to fly into a vigilante-style rage in response to the question: “Governor, if Kitty Dukakis were raped and murdered, would you favor an irrevocable death penalty for the killer?” Dukakis’ reply – “No, I don’t, and I think you know that I’ve opposed the death penalty during all of my life” – whacked his approval ratings from 49 percent to 42 percent overnight and helped deny him the election. So did that other failed protection drama that dominated the campaign: the specter of black convict Willie Horton (“every suburban mother’s greatest fear,” as one GOP ad put it), who raped a woman after being furloughed in Massachusetts while Dukakis was governor. His campaign belatedly tried to counter with an ad about a convict who escaped from a federal program and raped and killed a mother of two.

    Post-Sept. 11, the inclination to play the gender rescue card became an imperative. “Every suburban mother’s greatest fear” was now not a black man’s mug shot but a Muslim terrorist’s, and every suburban mother was recast by the pundits as a Security Mom (a mythical creature, as it happened, but that’s another story).

    This year, as always, the presidential candidates must contend with the rescue formula, complicated by the fact that Bush has so devalued its currency. In this climate, Hillary Clinton can do what her male counterparts cannot. She is, indeed, reaching for the gender card, as her accusers claim. It’s just different from the one they imagine. She is auditioning for the role of rescuer on a feminist frontier.

    She returned to Wellesley to tell female undergraduates that she was there to free them; she was there to help them “roll up our sleeves” and “shatter that highest glass ceiling.” As such, she latched onto a crucial element of presidential races past, and possibly to come – that at the core of all American political rescue fantasies is a young woman in need.

    In the general election, whoever the candidates may be, they will be tempted, perhaps required, to show just those bona fides. Clinton may be the only one who can do so without betraying the signature of a disgraced cowboy ethic.
    SUSAN FALUDI, a former Mercury News staff writer, is the author, most recently, of “The Terror Dream: Fear and Fantasy in Post 9-11 America.” She adapted this article for the Los Angeles Times from a longer version that appears at

  110. Mr. Empty Suit talks about the “divisiveness” of the 90’s, indirectly blames the Clinton’s for that, and announces how he is the “candidate of change” who can bring the country together.

    Does the guy have no shame ? Does he even know what happened in the 90’s when a hardworking President, against all odds, with a hostile, hateful congress and media managed to bring about an economic boom and was adored and respected the world over ? Has he forgotten or does he even care about the witchhunts and the hate that was directed towards them ? He hit a new low at the Iowa dinner when he said he wasnt running because of “ambition” ( ha ! does he take us to be idiots ?!!) or because he thinks he is “owed” the presidency ! The gall !! What does he have to show for ?? Just because he made a speech back in 2000 at an anti-war rally, when it was safe for him to do in an anti-war district, when his opponents in the primary also opposed the war and in a very liberal, democratic state ?

    He talks of uniting and bringing the country together. He talks of changing the “tone”. But the hyprocrite has no qualms about attacking Hillary personally, twisting her positions, downplaying a popular democratic president’s achievements and dismissing someone who has been actively involved in public service when he himself was busy lobbying for editor of the Harvard Law Review. And he doesnt know where those records of his time at the Chicago senate are.

    Someone is just not ready for primetime. Has never been. I am hoping he gets a good dose of reality after Iowa and NH.

  111. Support from the military for Hillary:
    Hillary gets the support of General Paul Eaton – 11/11/07
    Former second commander in Iraq, Major General (ret.) Paul D. Eaton joins General Clark in endorsing Hillary Clinton for President. MG Eaton is a member of the VoteVets Board of Advisors and made an ad for VoteVets, demanding George Bush engage in serious diplomacy, not escalation. General Eaton is the first on-the-ground Iraq commander to endorse a 2008 Presidential candidate.
    His endorsement statement:
    “I’m standing with Hillary Clinton today, because she has stood with us,” said Major General Eaton, who served in the army for 33 years, most recently serving in Iraq. “No one in this race has the strength and expertise on military and veterans’ issues that Hillary Clinton possesses.”

  112. Oh my, now Paul Eaton supports her. Are they still going to say she’s a neocon? Those tools. Ofcourse the media plays along with Obama and Edwards. They probably won’t even discuss the Eatong endorsement.

  113. You know, I’ve started pointing out that if Obama gets the nod, then we’re going to have 24 hour a day Rezko and up until the election, it’s going to be non-stop, Obama’s-mob-ties tv. The Obama folks don’t like being reminded of that. I also point out that Whitewater had officially been cleared by the RTC when Bill was running, and that didn’t prevent them from demanding a special prosecutor.

    I’ve started taking the gloves off a little more, and it isnt’ going over well. But I think Obama and Edwards (to a lesser degree) supporters need to learn that there are other fists in the room besides theirs. Because Clinton hasn’t attacked back, it hasn’t occurred to them that they can be attacked.

    The alliance between Edwards and Obama is weird considering the fact that Obama has sabotaged Edwards’ run. Hillary hasn’t. Edwards went to Iowa when he did in the first place to have a shot at beating her. Obama has almost entirely ruined his shot there. I have no idea why they regard themselves as kindred spirits.

  114. I am curious about a report I read about Obama and Rezko. It stated that Obama wanted a home that was listed at 2.5 (or 2.6)million. They either couldn’t afford it or didn’t want to be seen buying such an expensive home. So the home was split up into two lots and they bought the home and Rezko bought the other lot. They later bought the second lot from Rezko.

    Do I have the facts right? And my question is, if Obama spent his life as a neighborhood social worker and civil rights lawyer, where did he make the money to buy multi-million dollar homes? Does state government pay that well? Or is it Michelle who makes the big bucks? I’m curious about how this happens. I remember that Tip O’Neill lived in the same little house even as Speaker, and then made some big money after he retired, doing ads and speaking.

    Have these documents been released?

  115. michelle makes $340,000 plus as a …get this…administrator in a hospital…


    she got a $200,000 plus raise after her hubby became a Senator..

    Ii wont say elected, cause thats not quite what happened , is it?

    the rezko story is all true and worse…look in the archives here…

  116. Looks like Obama, who fought so hard for ethics reform in IL did not think record keeping is important; throwing away records by a state elected official in IL is legal?
    Well Well…we have come a long way in this ethics game? Welcome obama: throwing away records – personal or not – an elected official is legal!!!

    Well, I think this must be class 101 of ethics in the “Obama school of ethcial reform” given by a former professor of constititional law!!!!

  117. It Depends What the Meaning of ‘Makes Sense’ Is
    Tags: debates, Hillary Clinton

    Well, it finally arrived, the long-anticipated bump in Hillary Clinton’s road to the nomination, the bump that many predicted would slow her down and give her competitors a chance to catch up.
    Or did it?
    The media certainly thought so, and I don’t mean just the conservative media that pounce eagerly on any sign that she is faltering, or fudging, or over-reaching, or peaking too soon, or engaging in shady practices. (Unfortunately for the Fox-New York Post crowd, the Norman Hsu story doesn’t seem to have legs.) Everyone was writing her political obituary ten seconds after the last word was spoken in the October 29 debate. Liberal hand-wringers, self-identified feminists, concerned “old friends” – they were all standing over the body and taking bets on whether or not it could be revived.
    The other Democratic candidates were already piling on during the debate. And in the days that followed they did more of the same.
    Barack Obama just happened to be in the neighborhood when “Saturday Night Live” was doing its Halloween show and cleverly appeared as himself. Whipping off his Barack Obama mask to reveal – you guessed it – Barack Obama, he said to the actress playing Hillary that he was always the same person no matter where he was and no matter what the company. (Which means, I guess, that no matter where he is he always manages to say absolutely nothing in orotund and inspiring tones.)
    An Edwards campaign commercial set to Strauss’s “Blue Danube Waltz” showed a split screen with Hillary on both halves pronouncing on opposite sides of the same issue (or so we were to believe).
    And of course the Republicans waded in. Rudy Giuliani did Hillary imitations, complete with mincing steps and effete hand gestures, looking just like the cross-dresser we know him to be. Tucker Carlson whined that Hillary whined about getting beat up by an old boys club and harumphed that Obama, at least, didn’t ask people to stop attacking him because he was black. When his guest replied that no one was attacking Obama while everyone was attacking Clinton, Carlson muttered something about everyone being the object of attack in a political campaign. (A nice strategy: when the facts aren’t with you, rise above them.)
    And what exactly did Clinton do to deserve all this? She answered a question posed by moderator (in this case pit-bull) Tim Russert of NBC: “Governor of New York Eliot Spitzer has proposed giving driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants. You told the Nashua, New Hampshire, editorial board it makes a lot of sense. Why does it make a lot of sense to give an illegal immigrant a driver’s license?”
    It is now set in cement that Clinton first said it did make sense and then said it didn’t. (She was for it before she was against it.) But that’s not right. She said that it didn’t make sense in the abstract – if the question is should illegal immigrants be given driver’s licenses, perhaps just after they cross the border, the answer is obviously no – but given the federal government’s failure to pass meaningful immigration reform, a governor who knows that many documented workers are driving on his state’s roads might well think that it made sense to bring them within the state’s ambit. This is a position one could quarrel with, but it is coherent and not double-sided.
    Of course, it didn’t come across that way and that’s her fault. She began her answer by talking about Spitzer’s desire “to fill the vacuum left by the failure of this administration to bring about comprehensive immigration reform.” But this is too vague (what vacuum, exactly?) and seemed unresponsive.
    What she should have done is said something like, “To answer your question, it is necessary to ask another one: why has Governor Spitzer been driven to this desperate measure? What set of conditions has given him the Hobson’s choice between endangering the citizens of his state and legitimating illegal immigrants?” With the context of Spitzer’s proposal established, the question of whether or not it made sense would have been seen to be more complicated than Russert’s formulation of it suggested. (It would have been a better version of “it depends what the meaning of ‘is’ is.”)
    She could have then proceeded in a straight line to make her point and protected herself from the accusation – made by John Edwards on the spot – that she was talking out of both sides of her mouth. She wasn’t. It was a bad rap, although one she invited by failing to get the parts of her answers in the right order and thereby allowing her rivals to treat points that went together to form a whole as if they were separately, and inconsistently, made.
    But maybe Clinton’s real sin was giving an answer with parts. Later, when she insisted that she “did not say that it should be done” (“should” is a normative, universalizing word and she wanted to distance herself from it), Russert wasn’t having any: “Do you support his [Spitzer’s] plan,” he asked insistently.
    She replied that his was a “gotcha” question, and it was. It demanded either a yes or a no answer and therefore it was committed in advance to regarding any other answer – especially an answer with nuance – as waffling and equivocating.
    Does it matter? Is this the banana peel she slips on? I think not. On the same show that Chris Matthews was solemnly discussing how much damage this dust-up had done to the Clinton campaign, he was reporting continuing double-digit leads and announcing that his team of expert analysts had named her the likely nominee by a large margin.
    A few columns back I made some predictions that provoked outrage: that Clinton would reach 50 percent in the national polls; that fence-sitters would begin falling her way (hello, Walter Mondale); that she would begin pulling away in Iowa and New Hampshire. All that has happened, and I now make another prediction: get ready to hear “Hail to the Chieftess.”

  118. Oh yeah, I remember, my friend on the UDEMS was at the JJ dinner, she’s from Illinois and she is an Obama fan.

  119. Great article wb…what is the source? Hail to the chieftess…I can dig it! Re the missing IL records that Obama apparently “threw away”? I would think that if one was proud of ones accomplishments in the state house, that one would keep the documentation of it. But maybe that’s just me. I got correspondance from years and years ago because it marked important events and papers relative to my career. Like I said, maybe its just me. mollyj

  120. Apologies B. Merryfield, your comments mostly wound up in the spam filters. Just got them out. The spammers are working overtime today.

  121. I swear to you, I KNOW FOR A FACT SOMEONE FROM ILLINOIS AT THE EVENT. She’s from Moline or East Moline, I don’t remember.

  122. Well, Celiff, I suppose that would be considered a resident of Iowa. I think some of those 3k in the hall were from IL, but maybe we’ll never know.

  123. Let me give some light to the benefit of Major General
    Eaton’s endorsement. This is not an neocon or right v.
    left leaning endorsement.

    The military by today standards make’s only about 1.5%
    of the population. Democrats and the Democratic party
    have dismissed the military both active, reserve and veteran
    during and since Vietnam. They have disagreed with foreign and military policy and it has been viewed as an assult on the men and women in uniform. Democratic politicians see the military budge
    and see hugh chucks that could go for domestic purposes. But
    the military budget is a mear +/-4% today even with all that is going on about overseas.

    In this screwed up Bush made world, Republicans are viewed
    as strong on defense and the so call “war on terror.” Which
    seems to me to be poorly defined but never the less resonate
    with the public. Democrats today as 30 years ago have be
    antiwar (rightfully so) and anti-military. This is a hang up
    of the last two decades.

    Look at the last two rounds base closings and/or attempts
    at closings. They are primarily in states that vote Democratic
    and have the politicians have offered little military support
    other than for the base in their district or state.

    Only Hilliary of the Democratic candidates understands that
    as Commander in Chief requires respect, admiration and loyalty
    for the active services. She understands that the reserves
    and veterans play an important roll in the heritage of our
    country and our status in the world. They are not pons in
    a poker game. They are real human beings worthy of respect.

    While Democrats scream “end the war,” Hillary know that it
    must be handle in a way that wont make a bad situation

    Eaton’s endorsement will go a long way in establishing a rapport
    that the Democratic Party and pols do not have.

    A very good Veterans Day for Hillary….

  124. Clinton Cites Pragmatic Passion
    (DUBUQUE, Iowa) — Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton says she’s “driven by my passions” to get things done and suggests her image as a calculating politician comes from her pragmatic focus on results.
    “It’s a passion that I carry with me every single day,” Clinton said Monday in an interview with The Associated Press. “I also know that I live in the real world and I have to figure out how we’re going to get these changes done.”

    The price she pays for pragmatism is to sometimes be viewed as calculating, she said.

    “I see it as harnessing my passion to actually get results and make a difference in people’s lives,” she said. “I care deeply, but I also know I’ve got to build coalitions, I’ve got to bring people together. That’s what I’ve been doing and that’s what I will do.”

    In the interview, she dismissed suggestions that revelations her campaign had planted questions during campaign stops in Iowa reinforced any image for calculation.

    “I think in campaigns things happen and you just go on, and that’s certainly what I’ve done for 35 years and it’s what I’ve done for eight years in the White House and now seven years in the Senate,” said Clinton. She has indicated she knew nothing about the planted questions, but some of her rivals have cited the issue to argue she is less than genuine.

    “People can look at my record,” said Clinton.,8599,1683024,00.html

  125. hello folks,

    I think politico has a very valid point on why Clinton’s #s dipped a bit in NH while her nation wide #s are still fairly stable. It’s not about Obama/Edwards. Remember Romney/McCain are launching frantic ads in NH lambasting Clinton. Actually McCain has his second ad up in NH lashing out at Clinton’s so-called earmarks.

    When you look at the internals of those two polls, Clinton’s support among dems are fairly solid, it’s among ind, she took a hit….

    As long as Edwards/Obama have not gained much, I’m not overly worried…

    Per politico:

    This stuff just can’t be good for her poll numbers in New Hampshire.

    Script, in part:

    $233M for a bridge to nowhere.


    $3M to study the DNA of bears in Montana.


    A million dollars for a Woodstock Museum — in a bill sponsored by Hillary Clinton.


  126. Clinton camp turns the records table on Obama
    by Jill Zuckman

    Tired of constant criticism by Sen. Barack Obama, the Clinton campaign today dissected the Illinois’ senator’s statements about his own state senate records and accused him of “spreading misinformation” about Sen. Hillary Clinton’s White House records.

    Obama, as well as former Sen. John Edwards and the Republican National Committee, have repeatedly questioned Clinton’s candor and accused her of withholding documents from her time in the White House as First Lady.

    Those records are in the hands of the National Archives, with each one being vetted before being released to the public.

    Obama, on the other hand, has disclosed few of his records from his tenure as a state senator, the Clinton campaign charged, citing efforts by both the Tribune and the Sun-Times to obtain them.

    “First, Obama claimed that all his documents ‘the state considers to be public’ are publicly available,’’ the Clinton campaign said. But those documents are not actually available, the campaign said on its “HillaryHub” web site.

    The real issue, Clinton’s campaign said, is the availability of “schedules, memos and other documents” from Obama’s time in the state senate.

    On Meet the Press Sunday, Obama said he did not have a scheduler and therefore there are no schedules to be had. A spokesman for the Obama campaign said Obama passed along many of his files to his successor, Kwame Raoul.

  127. Mollyrichards, MJ: sorry the name did not copy. It is from a flash alerts I get from New York Times. The author is Stanley Fish, a legal and literary scholar of significant renown. Here is his bio from Wickopedia:

    Stanley Fish (born 1938) is a prominent American literary theorist and legal scholar. He was born and raised in Providence, Rhode Island. He is among the most important critics of the English poet John Milton in the 20th century, and is often associated with post-modernism, at times to his irritation. He is the Davidson-Kahn Distinguished University Professor of Humanities and a Professor of Law at Florida International University, in Miami, and dean emeritus of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences at the University of Illinois at Chicago. Professor Fish has also taught at the University of California, Berkeley, Johns Hopkins University, and Duke University. He is the author of 10 books.

  128. 1. Has anyone asked Kwame Raoul about these records Obama allegedly passed on?

    2. Everyone keeps an appointment book whether they have a paid scheduler or not.

    3. Anything related to finances has to be kept for up to 7 years in case of an IRS audit.

    Need I go on?

  129. I just found tons of articles before IA caucuses in 2004. Yespen was actually quite amusing. I’m wondering whether Obama really needs his kiss…

    On Nov 23, 2004, Yepsen wrote:

    Howard Dean won Tuesday’s debate of Democratic presidential candidates in Iowa. Wesley Clark came in second.

    Dean went into the two-hour gabfest with a new poll of likely Democratic caucus-goers showing he has retaken the lead in Iowa over Richard Gephardt, who has slipped back into second place while John Kerry occupies third. Frontrunners become pincushions in debates, and Dean handled the poking well, by staying above the fray and by not responding to every jab Kerry or Gephardt sought to administer.

    When he did, it was with respect and courtesy, a sign that Dean has calculated he might just win the Democratic presidential nomination and will someday need the enthusiastic support from those on stage with him, not their bitterness.

    The debate was held at the Polk County Convention Complex in Des Moines and was sponsored by the Democratic National Committee, NBC and MSNBC. News anchor Tom Brokaw moderated the event, which was telecast live by the network’s Des Moines affiliate, WHO-TV.

    While the race for the Democratic presidential nomination has become a running series of these debates, Tuesday’s was important in Iowa because it comes as the race begins to congeal here. Dean and Gephardt are in a struggle for first place. Kerry and John Edwards are fighting for third. The others aren’t competing here, have dropped off the radar screens or opted to run only token or protest campaigns.

    Going into the forum, Dean’s campaign was bolstered by a new WHO-TV poll showing he’s opened up a 10-point lead over Gephardt. Dean is getting support from 32 percent of likely caucus-goers. Gephardt gets 22 percent.

    In a poll taken last month, Gephardt had a 7-point lead.

    The new numbers are good news for Dean because it is the evidence his campaign is moving again after that early fall lull. Dean has picked up endorsements from two key labor unions, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees and the Service Employees International Union.

    He also launched a strong attack on Gephardt for supporting the war in Iraq. Unfortunately in American politics, attack ads work, especially when candidates such as Gephardt don’t have the money to respond effectively on television.

    So Gephardt had to go after Dean in Tuesday’s debate. As did Kerry. They tried, but neither offered anything new or did anything that forced Dean to stumble.

    Instead, Dean took the high road. At the end of the day, nothing had changed Dean’s position in Iowa as the guy on top. He also took a moment to praise one of his opponents, Dennis Kucinich, for voting against the Iraq war in the U.S. House.

    (Dean understands that Kucinich has a small but dedicated following in Iowa. On caucus night, when there aren’t enough Kucinich people at the caucuses to elect many delegates, Dean wants those people to move to his side.)

    Clark delivered a strong performance. The former general was forceful and sharp, as if he’s finally found his stride after, as he admitted Tuesday, he “bobbled” at the start of his campaign. He would have been the winner of Tuesday’s debate in Iowa, except he’s not campaigning here. He has no organization to harvest the support a performance like his would ordinarily generate.

    One wonders how this race would look today had Clark not waited so long to get into it.

    Clark’s performance will likely renew talk that he would make a good running mate with Dean. He could provide national-security credentials to a ticket headed by the Vermonter.

    Two things marred the event. Airing a debate like this during the middle of a workday made it difficult for many to watch. MSNBC’s evening rebroadcasts reach a relatively small audience.

    While NBC’s folks deserve a hats off for staging a classy show, it’s too bad they picked such a bad time to hold it.

    Also, the event was affected by the decision of Kerry and Edwards not to appear in person. They opted to be in Washington, D.C., to vote on the Medicare bill. In the end, however, their absence proved to be helpful since it cleared the cluttered stage of two bodies, enabling more focus on the Dean-Gephardt conflict.

    Senator Joseph Lieberman opted not to attend and so was not included in the satellite hookup afforded Kerry and Edwards. That left only the back-of-the-pack candidates – Clark, Kucinich, Carol Mosley Braun and Al Sharpton – on stage with the two heavy hitters.

    Dean respectfully criticized Gephardt and Kerry for voting for the war in Iraq, a vote that is unpopular with many Democratic caucus-goers, especially as the war drags on.

    While Dean has been dumping anti-Gephardt direct mail and running negative TV ads against Gephardt in Iowa, the doctor took none of that tone into Tuesday’s event.

    By returning to the high-road, Dean goes back to the “non-politician” style that has excited so many Democrats about his candidacy. Based on Tuesday’s performance, he’s back on top of this game.

  130. Wb, I really respect Stan Fish’s accomplishments and intellect (I remember when he was at the U of Illinois at Chicago and at Duke). The only thing I would’ve preferred was if Stan had included the info that this was at the end of a two hour debate during the 30 second lightening round…a round in which Obama got a question about air traffic (i think) and his halloween costume). mk

  131. Gee, these people are nuts. Bill Clinton said those boys are giving Hillary alot of trouble or something and now these nuts are saying he’s a racist.

  132. “When you look at the internals of those two polls, Clinton’s support among dems are fairly solid, it’s among ind, she took a hit….”


    Just a little background on the NH polling and voter registration. There’s no such thing as “independent” in New Hamshire. As in Massachusetts, you can register as a “Democrat”, a “Republican”, or “Undeclared”. An undeclared voter can go to a primary election and ask for either a Democratic primary ballot or a Republican primary ballot. They are then “declared”, but can “undeclare” again as they leave the polling place.

    Their were only 56 self-reported “Independents” in the UNH survey this weekend. These 56 broke 29% Obama to 22% Clinton to only 7% Edwards. I have no idea who those people are…since NH doesn’t have an “Indendent” category. The polling methodology says they included “likely voters” who intend to register to vote between now and the primary, so these could actually be unregistered voters (college students?). How “likely” someone is to vote 45 days from now if they are not yet registered is open to conjecture.

    In contrast there were 231 registered Democrats:

    34% Clinton
    21% Obama
    19% Edwards
    08% Richardson

    And 166 undeclared voters (this is the group that would be “independents” in most states’ terminology):

    36% Clinton
    21% Obama
    10% Edwards
    13% Richardson

    The upshot is that Obama is not doing better with so-called “independent” voters in NH. The small subsample of 56 voters that this notion is based upon is not a real category in this poll. The large group of “undeclared” NH voters planning to vote in the Democratic Primary actually breaks slightly more for Clinton than do registered Democrats.

  133. When I read the David Yepsen article on Dean in 2004 posted above, two random thoughts crossed my mind: i) no obvious attack against the frontrunner, and ii) a vague whiff of “Dewey Wins”.

  134. I am so glad they are going after him. Its time that the Clinton camp hit back. To be honest, I wish she had been a little more assertive at that debate rather than take the high ground – they were plain playing with the facts. She wanted to be above it all and chose not to defend herself as strongly as she should have especially when those two had gone back and forth themselves on so many things. Added to the fact that Edwards got personal in his attacks. At least the Factcheck hub is a relief but I do hope she hits back when they start to misrepresent her record.

    Obama made her records into an issue but eight years in the Illinios Senate and he says he did not keep records ? Who’s kidding whom? I never really disliked him before though he was obviously egocentric with a somewhat phony streak in him – but the last few weeks after he got personal, attacked her AND Bill, touted this holier than thou attitude and got carried away by the adulation that he gets in the media made me just so sick of him. They should hit him hard and let him know what it is to lie about someone when he himself is hiding so much. Who is two-faced now ?!!!

  135. Thanks, wb. Just read the comment above about Bill usin’ the term “boys” and now bein’ called a racist. Well, that is simply a lie. Bill is using the “familiar” language, if he indeed used that turn. Just like when Hillary said, “I’m your girl.” The same as when she referred to the Presidency as being an “all boys club.” People are running with every ridiculous fragment they can get their fingers on just so they can make trouble for our candidate. This is desperation. It is fear driven campaigning. Enough already. mollyj

  136. The records issue is a Hobson’s choice for Obama. If he says he didn’t even keep records, he highlights the fact that a part-time state legislator is about one rung above dog catcher in political terms. So, what’s he doing running for President three years later?

    If he tries to play up that being a part-time state legislator actually means something, then he has to deal with his lack of transparency on his records.

  137. cnn’s headline-hillary stalled! no questions for obama-lots of praise. the media is building a 2 way race here. i just hope they fail fast

  138. Wow, I can’t believe how many post we have. Great Job Admin and I love you’re calling out Tim “meet the hack” Russerts.

    I think it’s time to make some changes to media ownership…too much power in so few people hands. Thomas Paine wouldn’t recognise today’s America. This is more then a few media hacks in love with Obama…this is a concentrated media assault into propagandizing. Too much Republican talking points being repeated against one person…and that has to come from the top.

    Btw, Mika and MSNBC Morning Jowl…LOL on that have many family members involved in Obama campaign…not just her father. Also why is there so much silence from the democratic leadership on party unity…because I’ve only her Nancy Pelosi talked about that issue fleetingly

  139. cnn also did 3 stories on the “plant-gate.’ yes-they gave the plant deal a gate! most the hour was on hillary and how baffling it must be for her staffers” and “hillary has lost her mojo” obama “surging” etc.. so i turned it off. its on. one sotry on michelle obama’s comments on why blacks arent runnign to obama. and she was lame. maybe blacks dont like the idea of a total compromiser promising to work with the gop extremists on everything. that means watered down or destroyed bills, judge noms etc… most dems arent in the mood for this crap. go hillary

  140. Look Big Media has already sold out…they’re bias to the ninth degree so we should get out the message on the blogs and utilize Youtube and direct Hillary’s J&J speech with CSPAN’s link as much as possible and a link back to Hillary’s link.

    Just like advertizer do keep repeating Hillary’s message…who cares about Obama’s and Edwards…outside of analying their strategy but in letting them control the message through bias media….puh-lease.

    Have anybody contact HD net?

  141. Bill called a racist for saying the ‘boys have been getting tough’ on his wife?!
    Excuse me, but, there are 8 democrats running, 1 is a woman, 1 is an AA, 1 is a latino, what about the rest of the white guys? Is he being racist to them also? Or is it just convenient to shout out that he is picking on Obama because of the color of his skin? Isn’t this the same they accused Hillary for doing? Playing the gender card?

    Anyways, Hillary is in a bad news cycle now, she needs to do something to change the focus. She should go out and pick a fight with the White House, or Pentagon…That was a good few weeks! 😀

    Yeah, go after the shrub! And not just talking points, GO AFTER HIM, get good headlines again and rise above JE and BO, that will leave them crying, after finally getting some attention, haha.

  142. They are set on destroying her. If they are going with “plant-gate” they are set on destroying her. Where the heck is Howard Dean?

  143. Kostner, I am struck by the HuffPo headline about Johnny being hedged in because of public financing. Take Trippi/Axelrod, Johnny’s triangulating and the money woes and it’s a perfect concoction for the JE/Bwak alliance- only thing is JE will finish second out there in the balloting because he has gone seriously negative. Bwak has, too, and that’s one difference from 2004 when half the field was AWOL. Think about it: Kerry was spared Dean and Gephardt’s fate by being in DC that night. Edwards was gone, too, but no one took his candidacy seriously then (or now). Anyone think Bwak might possibly play hooky
    so to hang Johnny some more while he reaps the benefit?

    The other difference is Dean the leading candidate at the tie of the caucus was already negative on Gephardt. Hillary hasn’t gone that route. Instead she is using superior organizational skills, a pile of money (or threat of it since her spending in IA isn’t what Johnny’s or Bwak’s is and she is relying on her message and the tendency of voters to speak in Utopian terms prior to the balloting and then voting/caucusing in more relevant and dare I say “adult” terms. IOW, they won’t waste their votes.

    I think Biden, Dodd, and Richardson are just hanging back hoping to be Kerry this time. They’ll play slightly hard but they won’t act like a bunch of ballers. Richardson has been criticized for several comments chastising the “ballers,” but I think he is just staying true to his own personality where he tries to remain on message and find points of reconciliation as a negotiator. Unfortunately, with the current state fo foreign affairs and his lack of domestic policy experience he is not perceive as a fighter but as a useful diplomat to be deployed before the hammer comes down. Biden is a hammer and I love him and his one liners, but his Senate experience either makes him Senate majority leader or it makes him a traditional VP. He lacks the finish of our girl. Dodd also is a statesman, but he’s a bit too nostalgic and a bit too battle-hardened to translate with voters. Hell, he doesn’t even translate with Dems in his own state which gives him the stink of a loser, he can only hope now to shape policy discussions and “goon” the race.

    I have gooned a race before just in an effort to get my policy ideas on record publicly and force alliances. It does work.

    In reference to the last thread, Admin admonished us to settle down as others are watching. Some of those people are in the media and others are with campaigns. We should all be vigilant not to harm our candidate. To show her loyalty and to remain as classy as we can be (terrondt, I share your pain re: the punk- he’s not the only one BTW). This site is great, but the real battleground is on the ground in real time. Let Johnny and Bwak’s folks battle it out on Kos. We all saw how much that did for Dean- it gave the viewing public an unrealistic expectation of how he would do in the early states. Let’s not play that expectation game. Let’s go out there and earn every vote as our girl pledges she will do. We are in some sense her unendorsed proxies. Let’s make her proud and not tip off the enemy or embarrass her.

    Texan, did you see what Wolf opened with this afternoon? He needs a story and does what producers say. It’s a slow news day. There will be plenty of them and every time there is, they will shine a floodlight at Hillary. It’s not like any of them will do any real work when they can run another story on Brit, K-Fed and their spawn or talk about Hillary’s cleavage and whether her moles are Braille for Hugo Chavez’s spies.

  144. guys, mathews over and over again showing clips of obama at the jj dinner and no clips of hillary speaking. f*cking a**hole!!!!

  145. Yeah, When I got on the computer, the first story I saw on AOL was about Hillary’s staff “caught cheating.”

    I know how the media works, and this needs to be nipped in the bud.

  146. Sweet blog special: “Black America will wake up”–Michelle Obama on MSNBC.
    WASHINGTON—With polls showing African-Americans have yet to give overwhelming support to White House hopeful Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), his wife Michelle said “black America will wake up and get it” in an interview running on MSNBC on Monday.

    MSNBC is using excerpts of a Michelle Obama interview to run in full on Tuesday morning. In a clip that’s featured in the afternoon cycle, Michelle Obama invoked the name of civil rights leaders Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King Jr. when talking about African-American turnout, a crucial voting bloc for the Illinois senator.

    Michelle Obama said there was a “natural fear of possibility” and that there were times in her life when she was put down and not encouraged. There is “always that doubt in the minds of people of color.”

    She said the African-American community has to shake of its fear

    “That’s what we want to show our community,” Michelle Obama said. “…We can do this too.”

    If elected, Obama, whose mother was white and father black, would be the first African-American president.

    MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski landed the exclusive with Michelle Obama. Her father, Zbigniew Brzezinski, is one of Barack Obama’s national security advisors.
    I’m a African American and the Obamas are pissing me off. Go one and keep down talking African Americans…who gives a “rat ass” over these fakers…geesh.

    Hey Michelle what did you and Barack promise the Ripublicans to get all this support because for two people who have been beneficiaries of the fights of the 60’s you sure do like to turn the page. This tells me that they are a bunch of fakers and are not even listening to those Civil Rights heroes they like to trot out like old dead weight.

    Hey Jesse I heard you speak about Obama should talk about issues and not do attack politics. Hey Al I heard you preached unity when you ran for president last year…I hope you come over to the Hillary Clinton Train because your wisdom is not being appreciated in ObamaLand.

  147. I loved Hillary’s speech. She really defined what it is to be a Democrat. But, let’s face it, saying Hillary gave a great speech is dog bites man. She’s expected to.

  148. yep-the leaders of our party need to stand up publically against this crap pronto. bc this not only affects hillary but the gerneral as well. they need to stand for the sake of the party

  149. Check out the video of flagpoles falling after a press conference Hillary held. hehe

    But of course huffpo needed to be dramatic and make the headline be:

    Hillary Clinton attacked by flagpoles at press conference, lol

  150. “But, let’s face it, saying Hillary gave a great speech is dog bites man. She’s expected to.”
    mj I don’t agree with your statement. Bill Clinton was the speech giver, not Hillary. So I really, really think the pundits and candidate underestimeated her.

    But at the J.J. dinner Hillary was the big hit….it’s rare that a politican would have a room that big, so quiet during a portion of their speech because people were listening intently. At that moment she was the PRESIDENT and everybody in that room knew it.

    Now we got to get her in the White House by first winning the nomination but did anybody really think the attacks were going to stop?

    BTW, that president point is a bit strong but that’s how I’d saw it.

  151. Michelle Obama is getting on my nerves:

    “WASHINGTON—With polls showing African-Americans have yet to give overwhelming support to White House hopeful Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), his wife Michelle said “black America will wake up and get it” in an interview running on MSNBC on Monday.”

    Michelle maybe you should wake up and join the rest of us, we are already awake!!!

  152. Michelle is getting on my nerves, too. The statement about black america “getting it” makes it sound like Obama is entitled to the black vote. And yet he has the nerve to accuse Hillary, indirectly but unmistakeably, of acting as if she’s entitled to the nomination.

  153. CNN keeps on running the 4th or 5th anti-Hillary story, ‘is she vulnerable’, ‘is she stumbling’…

    Sick. The media is working overtime to drag down Hillary. If Obama is exposed to such hostile media, he will be creamed in no time in GE.

    I guess there’s really little we can do at the moment. I suggest we all turn off the MSM for the next couple of days, if not weeks. They will be shocked. shocked at how resilient Hillary’s supporters are at the polls.

    MSM’s pile-on George W. Bush in the final stretch of 2004 election certainly did not help Kerry close the deal.

  154. guys, i just had a strange instant messaging on aol from a so called hillary supporter. he or she reads the site but is not a member and got my username from aol. but this person tried to ask me about a possible hillary backdoor running this site. like the person was fishing for inside info of the identity of the owner of the site. i told this person i don’t think so. as soon as i refuted the charge the person disappeared without saying goodby. has anybody had this happen to them?

  155. carbynew, great analysis, and spot on in my view. She was captivating during the time she got the entire room ‘silent’ just listening to every word she uttered. And she looked and sounded Presidential indeed!! She may not(in some peoples view, not mine) be the most charismatic person in the world, but she sure has ‘that’ presence that I’m sure many of the others envy her!

    Before this race began, the media didn’t think she would do well in the debates,
    “she’s too stiff, she’s not charismatic, she wont connect with the audience….” She proved them wrong. And they didn’t, and I’ll be honest her, I didn’t really either, think she would be this good making speeches.

    It is almost as if she is better when doing a speech in a setting like this, not reading from prompters, and not doing her regular stomp speech. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, she is like red wine, she only gets better with age!!!!

  156. The next debate is on November 20. I fully expect that Hillary will beat back the dogs. “The New York Daily News” (for what it’s worth) has an article that asks what happened to Hillary’s mojo. Granted her edge in the five latest polls, I would say, “Nothing has happened to her mojo”:

    Rasmussen +23
    AP-Ipsos +23
    NBC/WSJ +22
    CNN +19
    USA Today/Gallup +28
    Average: +23

    Her mojo is just fine, thank you.

  157. I don’t use aol, do think this was just a person wondering? Or could it have been a reporter hoping to get a scoop?

    If so, why ask any of us? We don’t know anything about this site, lol, admin is secretive, but I like!

  158. kostner, How do you think she will do in the debate?

    And I agree with you about turning off the MSM. Admin told us how to keep our eyes on the prize and our blood pressure down, lol.

  159. Hillary’s JJ speech

    Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you Iowa Democrats. Thank you all. Thank you. What a night. What a great, great night. Thank you all. There’s no better place to be than right here in Iowa with the great elected officials that you have: your governor, your lieutenant governor, your congressional delegation, our wonderful friend, Senator Tom Harkin and his wife Ruth. Isn’t it a special treat to have the speaker of the house, madam speaker here tonight?


    You know, on January 20th, 2009, someone will stand on the steps of the Capitol and raise his or her hand – [Applause] – to take the oath of office as the 44th President of the United States of America. And we are here tonight to make sure that that next president is a Democrat. [Applause] Because, we know, after seven years of George W. Bush, seven years of incompetence, cronyism, and corruption, seven years of a government of the few by the few and for the few. We, as a nation cannot afford any other choice.

    We have to have a Democratic president because we have big challenges to meet. We have a war to end. We have an economy to revive. We have a 47 million Americans to insure. We have an energy crisis to solve. We have a homeland to protect, we have alliances to rebuild and we have a world to lead. So, we are ready for change.


    But, you know what? Change, change is just a word if you do not have the strength and experience to make it happen. [Applause] We must nominate a nominee who has been tested, and elect a president who is ready to lead on day one.


    I know what it is going to take to win. I know it’s going to take all of us and millions more and a candidate who will work and fight every single day for the next year and then will go into the White House determined to bring about that change that we care so much about. Fortunately, I have a little experience standing up and fighting for what I believe is right and what I think America needs and how we can get there together.


    I have spent 35 years making a difference and fighting for what I believe matters to people. As a young lawyer, I went to work for the Children’s Defense Fund, fighting for abused and neglected kids, fighting for kids in the foster care system, fighting for kids with disabilities, kids without health care, kids without educational opportunities. In Arkansas, I helped to expand health care into rural areas and to reform the school system so that every child would have a chance to succeed.

    As president, I will continue those fights. Continue so that we leave no person and no child out of America’s promise. As first lady, I fought my heart out for health care, and, well – [Applause] – we might not have been successful that time, but I am so proud that I played a part helping to create the Children’s Health Insurance Program and to insure 6 million children. When I’m president, we are going to finish the job and provide quality affordable health care for every single American man, woman, and child.


    And, as Senator, I have continued to fight for family farmers and for workers. To fight for soldiers to get the body armor they needed, and for first responders to get the health care they required after 9/11. I have fought against the privatizing of Social Security and against the failed policies of George W. Bush at home and around the world. [Applause] And, when I am President, I will work to reverse the damage of the eight years of George Bush and I will restore the pride and progress in America that should be our birthright. That is who America is. We want to be proud again. We want to be progressive again and we will, when I am president.


    Now, there are some who will say that they do not know where I stand. Well, I think you know better than that. I stand where I have stood for 35 years. I stand with you and with your children, and with every American who needs a fighter in their corner for a better life. Now, I know how easy it is in a campaign to get distracted; to focus on who is up and who is down, and who says what about whom. But, that is not what this election is about.

    This election is about those Iowans and those Americans who feel invisible in their own country; who feel invisible to their own president. This election is about the woman I met in LeClair. She and her husband both work really hard, but they had to sell half the family farm to pay their medical expenses. This election is about a veteran I met in Sioux center, who bravely fought in Iraq and came home and had to keep fighting to get the health care that he needed. This election is about the mother from Greenville, whose daughter got sick and they did not have insurance, and she died. And on her death certificate, they could not even put a cause of death, because nobody had ever made a diagnosis. She was just 18-years old. There should not be any invisible Americans and when I am president, there will not be. We will have a president again, who gets up every day, worries about, thinks about, and fights for every single one of us. That’s what America deserves, and that is what my candidacy offers.


    Now, we are getting closer to the Iowa caucuses. They are going to be earlier than ever before. I know as the campaign goes on, that it’s going to get a little hotter out there. But that is fine with me. Because, you know, as Harry Truman said, if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. I’ll tell you what, I feel really comfortable in the kitchen.


    So, we have to ask ourselves, what is this election going to be focused on? Well, I will tell you what I want to do. I am not interested in attacking my opponents. I am interested in attacking the problems of America, and I believe — [Applause] — we should be turning up the heat on the Republicans; they deserve all the heat we can give them.


    You know, you listen to the Republicans who are running- year, they see eight more years of George Bush. They see a nine trillion dollar debt and say let’s spend trillions more. They see that we had one rush to war and then say, wait, wait, why have one more? Well, I think we are going to tell them, in the course of this campaign, that they do not have any more time. America is done with the Republicans and their failed policies and their refusal to give America back the future that we deserve. But we Democrats, we have to decide what we are for. We Democrats believe that the middle class is the backbone of our country and the guarantor of the American dream. so, when the Republicans stand by and watch rising gas prices and rising health care costs and increase in college tuition and falling housing prices, and struggling families, and they have turned china into our banker, what are we going to do?

    Turn up the heat!

    And we Democrats, we believe that every child has a god-given potential that we want to help unlock. So, when the Republicans cut Head Start, and refuse to fix No Child Left Behind? What do we do?

    Turn up the heat!

    And when we Democrats fight for universal health care and the Republicans veto health care for child and the let the insurance companies and the drug companies undermine health care for the rest of us, what do we do?

    Turn up the heat!

    And we Democrats, we believe in labor rights and women’s rights and gay rights, and civil rights.


    And we believe in a department of labor that is actually pro labor, and a Department of Justice that delivers justice. So, when the Republicans tried to turn the clock back on women’s rights, when they tried to stomp out labor unions, when they try to undermine civil rights, what do we do?

    Turn up the heat!

    And we Democrats, we believe in protecting the environment and we believe in solving the energy crisis. So, when the Republicans turn over our energy policy to the oil companies and deny global warming, what do we do?

    Turn up the heat!

    And we Democrats, we believe in a government that works for all Americans again. We actually believe in appointing qualified people to do the jobs in the United States Government. So, when the Republicans stock the government with their cronies, when they give no-bid contracts to Halliburton and legal immunity to Blackwater, what do we do?

    Turn up the heat!

    And we Democrats, we believe in the power of science and innovation. We know it can lift up lives and grow the economy, so when President Bush declares a war on science, when he bans stem cell research, when he tries to turn Washington into an evidence free zone and put ideology in front of facts. What do we do?

    Turn up the heat!

    And finally, we believe that our country is both great and good. And as president, I will end the war in Iraq, end the era of cowboy diplomacy and restore America’s standing and leadership in the world.


    So, when the Republicans engage in fear-mongering and saber-rattling and talk about World War III, what do we do to them?

    Turn up the heat!

    Well, that is what it’s going to take. We are going to turn up the heat on the Republicans and we are going to turn America around. But, we cannot do it if we are not united and together; not only Democrats, but independents, and even Republicans who reject this radical experiment in extremism. I know we can win this election and I know we don’t have a choice. I am proud to have the support of so many Democrats and Democratic leaders from across America. And I am especially proud to have the support of so many Democratic leaders from the so- called red states to know that I can win. Leaders like the governor Beebe of Arkansas and Senator Bayh of Indiana and Governor Ted Strickland of Ohio, who is here with me tonight. [Applause] Because, Democrats know, when we win Ohio, we win the White House.


    I am so grateful to all of the Iowans who are supporting me and I absolutely appreciate everything you have done for me and for all of the candidates throughout the campaign. I ask all of you to join my campaign. I ask you to go and stand for me in the caucus on January 3. If you will stand for me for a night, I will stand and fight for you every day in this campaign and every day in the White House. Because together, we are going to restore America’s leadership, rebuild a strong and prosperous middle-class, reform the government and reclaim the future for our children. Let’s do it, Iowa Democrats. Let’s make sure that we turn up the heat and turn America around. Thank you and God bless you.

  160. gorto, i think i agree. this person came off as a diehard hiilfan at first, then it veered off on induendo about a connection. strange coming from a hillfan. i could care less and don’t know. all i know is I LOVE THIS SITE!!!

  161. Gorto, It’s Nov. 15. BTW, there has been a change in mojo if you look at how the media now says she’s stumbling when they were saying two weeks ago she was inevitable. But that’s a narrow definition, of course.

  162. I’m surprised you guys are surprised. Especially after Yepson’s column yesterday where he had such a wide stance he was practically rubbing his shoe up against Obama’s under the stall divider.

    The Georgetown Social Club spent the weekend in Iowa hanging out in the hotel bars and getting a bite to eat with the “in-crowd” on the Obama campaign. Hell, Time’s Swampland even blogged about going to Wendy’s with the Obama folk.

    None of that matters because the Georgetown Social Club doesn’t vote in Democratic primaries. I can’t think of a single example where the Georgetown Social Club’s candidate actually won the Democratic nomination.

    Just relax. The more they pimp Obama, the more voters are forced to try to picture him as Commander-in-Chief. All the pimping in the world doesn’t change the fact that he was a part-time state legislator three years ago. With two wars, the threat of terrorism, and the economy on the verge of recession, I doubt very seriously that the American voters are looking to find the bet part-time state legislator to attack America’s problems.

Comments are closed.