Looks like Newt Gingrich is going to give it a go: he wants Americans to raise for him $30M by Oct. 21 and then he'll reward them by running for president!
Thanks! Rudy's too liberal for Republicans in California...according to former LA mayor Richard Riordan, who endorsed, uh, Rudy, today.
Dan Gilgoff suggests we might want to check out Beliefnet’s exclusive video of John McCain, in which he says the "Constitution established the United States of America as a Christian nation ," that he's in talks with his pastor about undergoing a full-immersion baptism to become a full-blown evangelical, and that the prospect a Muslim presidential candidate makes him uncomfortabl
Hillary Clinton endorses the stakeholder society concept: baby bonds, $5000 worth, to every new tiny American. That's $20B per year. And veteran Hillary watcher Pat Healy explains that laugh.
Provocative comments from John Edwards about the destiny of African American men.
[The] fate of his campaign hinges on his internal monologue. Can he accept running a campaign that doesn't match his high-minded ideals--one that may come down to attack ads and a gritty Iowa ground game? And will he understand that people are trying to get him "fired up" because they're worried he hasn't done it on his own?
The Atlantic's Boldest -- A Weekly Corrections Column
And by weekly, I mean -- we try.
Perhaps in honor of ENDA, I turned Erin Van Sickle, the Florida Republican Party's communications director, into EriC Van Sickle. She is most definitely an Erin.
I wrote that Mike Huckabee "surprised" the world with a third place finish in the Ames straw poll. In truth, he "stunned" the world with a second place finish.
For about an hour, this gibberish sat atop a post on Rudy Giuliani: "“Rudy Giuliani has spent in New Hampshire and has yet, but his campaign has found other ways to grab voters attention.”
I wrote that the RNC's Presidential Trust dinner is scheduled for 2008. It's actually scheduled for Oct. 16, 2007.
A Poll I Like: Americans Want Candidates To Ignore Cell Phones
When a presidential candidate is in the middle of giving a campaign speech, do you think he or she should interrupt the speech to take a cell phone call from their spouse, or should the call be ignored until after the speech?
Another internal memo, this one from David Bonior, campaign manager to the now publically financed John Edwards.
In question-and-answer style, Bonior assures campaign staff and supporters that the decision to accept public financing for the primaries was "the right one."
What does it all mean?
Understand this: This in no way handicaps us in the early primary states, and it does not put us at a disadvantage going into the general election. If anything, this decision will help us win the nomination in two ways: our strength with the grassroots means we will get a boost not available to candidates who depend on large contributions; and we will be running the campaign in a way that reinforces John’s central campaign message.
Under the public financing system for presidential primaries, once a candidate demonstrates broad-based public support by raising $5,000 of matchable contributions in each of at least 20 states, the government will match up to $250 of an individual’s contributions to that candidate. In return, the candidate agrees to limit campaign spending for all primary elections, limit campaign spending in each state and limit spending from personal funds to $50,000.
Bonior insists that the campaign will maintain a "reserve" to fight Republicans between the clinching of the nomination -- probably Feb. 5 or thereabouts -- and the convention.
Has a presidential campaign ever sent an e-mail from the candidate with the subject line: "Hey"? And signing off with his first name? (Update: Yes -- Chris Dodd has, using U-Stream technology ... so Obama is borrowing another Doddnovation.)
For Huckabee, Santa Claus Is A Secret Weapon
In South Carolina, when Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas, drops by churches, bake sales and house parties, he plays the role of Elijah, the prophet. welcome at the dinner table wherever he arrives. "I'm not coming to the evangelical movement," he says, "I'm coming from the evangelical movement."
In South Carolina, 40 percent of the Republican primary voting base are evangelical Christians. Of those evangelicals, about 75% are members of the Southern Baptist Convention
.
Since his surprise second-place showing at the Ames straw poll in August, Huckabee's campaign directors believe he has established a foothold among conservative Christian voters in Iowa and South Carolina. They point to his first place showing at a statewide straw poll conducted by the Palmetto State Family Council -- a poll for which the campaign did little overt organizing.
Former Gov. David Beasley is Huckabee's chief surrogate in the state. He calls the Palmetto straw poll win "as much of a natural phenomenon as there is in politics." Conservative networks, he said, lit up with e-mail chains before the vote, and Huckabee, "who can speak their language, can fire them up, and at the same time, maintain the viability to appeal to the rest of them" outpolled the field.
Huckabee's volunteer foot soldiers generally fall into one of three affinity groups. They're parents of home-schooled children; the national home school coalition's president is a campaign organization. Or they're supporters of the Fair Tax movement; hundreds helped Huckabee in Iowa. Or they're pastors themselves: very quietly (and legally), pastors for Huckabee are evangelizing circuits in Iowa and South Carolina.
Huckabee's campaign pays about two dozen staff members. One star is Sarah Huckabee, his national field director, and his daughter.
To climb in the polls, Huckabee faces several ladders. He needs to shake off the perception that he's really running for vice president. Such a notion serves as an artificial ceiling to him. He needs to raise money. He needs to find a way to persaude politically savvy voters than he can win.
I asked Huckabee's campaign manager, Chip Saltzman, whether he worried about his rivals spending millions on television ads in November and December, moves that would essentially blot out the rest of the field.
"Well, we have one great ally that everybody has discounted," Saltzman told me. "And that's Santa Claus."
No -- this isn't a religious thing. Saltzman concedes that Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani will saturate the airwaves in December. "But they can't get louder than Apple, or Chevy or Ford. There's going to be so much static between Thanksgiving and Christmas, and even trying to sending mail during Christmas is something that you really can't do."
Huckabee's advisers believe that the field is stagnant until then. They insist that he'll have saved enough money to run a solid flight of television ads in Iowa and South Carolina and maybe New Hampshire in December and early January.
Sen. Sam Brownback hopes there are four tickets out of Iowa, but Huckabee knows he needs to finish in the top three. "First class, business class or coach, we'd like a ticket," Saltzman jokes.
New Hampshire is tougher. State Sen. Bob Cleg, Huckabee's New Hampshire chairman, has dealt with a surge of curiosity and event requests since the straw poll. Cleg wants to see a "steady climb" between now and primary day. "Since the Iowa straw poll, we've done nothing but go up." Key to Huckabee's appeal in New Hampshire -- a state not known for its cultural conservatism -- is his resume. As Governor of Arkansas, Huckabee dealt with a Supreme Court that ordered changes to education funding, just like New Hampshire. "He's great on infrastructure, too, and on S-CHIP... people come to see him and know that he's already resolved some of the issues they're dealing," Cleg says.
Two potential pitfalls: demographic changes in South Carolina, where the less conservative areas have grown, where snowbirds have flown in from New York, where non Carolina voters are becoming more common. Rudy Giuliani, in fact, is counting on these changes. But Beasley dismisses them, "The electorate hasn't changed to any real degree since the 2000 elections."
And Fred Thompson. Cleg dismisses him with a quip: "Mike Huckabee can communicate. Fred Thompson can't."
Thompson Will Stand Between Romney And Rudy
When Fred Thompson participates in his first debate in Detroit 10/9, he'll be visually bracketed by his two main competitors. To his right will stand Mitt Romney; Rudy Giuliani will stand to his left.
Newt Gingrich's American Solutions workshop kicks off here at 7:00 pm ET.
Subtlety, thy name is Obama. Distinctions ought to be distinct, as in, clear. His supporters are beginning to worry. Portfolio's Matthew Cooper has a slightly different, though no less interesting, take.
The Giuliani campaign responds, through Steve Forbes, to a worried Club for Growth.
Mark Blumenthal writes on two trends in the crosstabs of the latest New Hampshire polls. Hillary "can win" and McCain might resurge.
Why Did Edwards Do This? Pros and Cons
Advisers to Sen. John Edwards argued that the decision to opt in to the public finance system will boost the campaign's coffers before the primaries, but conceded that the campaign's fundraising to date had not met their expectations.
"Before we did this," one adviser said, "there were only two campaigns [Obama's and Clinton's] who thought they'd be around before the primaries with about $20M or $30M on hand. Now, we're going to be right there with them. We're going to have between $18M and $21M on hand now. That'll give us a huge boost."
"The bigger implication here is that there are now three campaigns with major wherewithall going into the primaries," the aide said.
But entering federal financing system has two major drawbacks. There's an overall spending limit for the primaries, so a campaign that blows through its money would be bankrupt until after its convention, allowing the opposing party's candidate to air television ads without rebuttal. (As Edwards adviser-then-Dean-manager Joe Trippi said in 2003: "This campaign believes that any Democratic campaign that opted into the matching-funds system has given up on the general election.”).
And the candidates are severely constrained in what they can spend in the states. There are fairly strict caps in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.
An Edwards aide said that the campaign had run the numbers and concluded that they have yet to exceed spending limits. The arcane and fairly complicated allocation laws will help: if Edwards's campaign runs a television ad in Davenport, since 70% of the audience for that ad is in next-door Illinois, 70% of the cost of the ad will count towards Illinois's limit, and not Iowa's. And even for the Iowa portion, the campaign is require to allocate 50% to the limit.
Another loophole: some organizing expenses do not count towards the cap, and the Edwards campaign will claim that most of their Iowa staff expenses to date have been related to field organizing and fundraising.
"We will 100% abide by the rules and the spending limits that come with this," Trippi said today.
Trippi offered a preview of how Edwards will sell the decision in Iowa and other states.
"Iowa gets to choose between a Democrat who is taking the money of health care lobbyists and insurance lobbyists and corporate lobbyists and PACs who will almost certainly blow through the spending limits that they would have to abide by under public financing against a Democrat who has never taken a dime of PAC money and has never taken a dime of lobbyists money, and now, will stay within the public financing system in Iowa, which will give the people of Iowa the change to decide who will go to Washington and represent them on all these issues?"
John Who?
Ten mintues after John Edwards confronted Hillary Clinton with his most audacious challenge yet, this press release crosses the threshold of the server:
Official Edwards Statement: Challenges Clinton Campaign To Follow Him
EDWARDS TAKES NEXT STEP IN REJECTING MONEY FROM SPECIAL INTERESTS BY SEEKING PUBLIC FINANCING
Challenges Clinton, who said on Sunday she supports public financing, to join him now in ending the money game in Washington
Chapel Hill, North Carolina – Today, Senator John Edwards announced he will be seeking public financing for the 2008 presidential primary campaign. Just as he challenged the Democratic Party to stop accepting contributions from lobbyists, today Edwards is again taking the lead in ending the money game in Washington.
“You can't buy your way to the Democratic nomination – you should have to earn the votes of the American people with bold vision and ideas,” said Edwards’ campaign manager Congressman David Bonior. “This is the most expensive presidential campaign in history, by far. And the simple fact is that the influence of money in politics – and the focus on raising money in this election – has gotten out of control. It’s time to get back to focusing on the issues that matter to the American people. That’s why John Edwards has decided to play by the rules that were designed to ensure fairness in the election process by capping his campaign spending and seeking public financing.”
Since the campaign began, Edwards has focused on issues that matter to the American people – universal health care, the war in Iraq, education, global warming and helping American workers. He’s promised to end the game in Washington and has challenged the Democratic Party to send a powerful signal to the American people about whose support really matters by refusing to accept donations from federal lobbyists. Senator Clinton has refused to stop taking contributions from federal lobbyists, saying that public financing is the solution to ending the influence of lobbyists.
“Senator Clinton said she believes public financing is the answer to ending the influence of lobbyists and special interests in Washington,” said Congressman Bonior. “If she really believes that, she should join Senator Edwards and seek public financing, or she should explain to the American people why she does not mean what she says.”
Under the public financing system for the presidential primaries, the government will match up to $250 of an individual’s contributions to an eligible candidate. To establish credibility, a candidate must show broad-based public support by proving to the FEC that he or she has raised in excess of $5,000 of matchable contributions in each of at least 20 states. This is done through a threshold submission to the FEC. In addition a candidate must also agree to: limit campaign spending for all primary elections; limit campaign spending in each state; and limit spending from personal funds to $50,000.
Currently the campaign is working on the first step in this process - to make its threshold submission to the FEC in order to establish Senator Edwards’ eligibility to receive matching funds.
“Edwards has raised more than any Democratic candidate in history before this race. We have more than enough money to compete,” said Congressman Bonior. “The truth is, this election is about ideas – not how much money you’ve raised. And no one has better ideas for how to bring real change to America than John Edwards. That’s why we’re confident he can not only compete in this election – but he will win.”
-30-
Edwards Opts Out: More
In deciding to accept public funds for his presidential campaign today, Edwards is changing course. He supports public financing, but he said that he would need more resources to "compete" in order to win the presidency and change the system.
An aide to Barack Obama reacted with one word: "Wow."
The Clinton campaign had no immediate comment.
Edwards Will Accept Public Financing For His Campaign
Surprising his rivals, Ex-Sen. John Edwards today said his presidential campaign will accept federal matching funds and the corresponding spending limitations that come with them.
Edwards had previously planned to opt out of the system, which would have allowed him to raise and spend freely after he secured the Democratic nomination ... if he secured the Democratic nomination.
The decision suggests that Edwards's fundraising did not meet the campaign's expectations, which provided for a $45M budget through the primary season.
More....
The Metaphysics Of The Democratic Primary
Mark Bubriski, the Florida Democratic Party's spokesman, doesn't like how I described the party's January 29 vote, which won't allocate any delegates to the Democratic convention.
Florida’s January 29th election is not a “beauty contest” or a “straw poll.” On January 29, 2008, there will be a fair and open primary election run by the State of Florida at the cost of $18 million, which will maximize voter participation. Labeling this event anything but an ELECTION is disrespectful, inaccurate and misleading. The nation will be watching, and the results of Florida's Democratic primary will likely impact the race. Florida Democrats will be allocating our delegates based on the Jan. 29 results, and we are confident that the eventual nominee will seat all 210 of these delegates.
Far be it from me to offend my home state, but by calling it a "beauty contest," I simply recognize reality, which is that the Democratic National Committee is the controlling legal authority over delegate selection.
Lest you think Florida Democrats will martyr themselves to get back at Howard Dean, there's a chance that the Democratic vote in Florida will effect perceptions of the race going into February 5, especially because the media will probably not be able to ignore the spectacle of millions of Democrats voting ... covering the mechanical story itself lend some legitimacy to the Democratic winner.
Of course the accumulation of delegates is material to the nomination, but in January and February, it somehow occupies -- or has occupied, historically, -- the back seat. Perception drives the story forward. The DNC bets that delegate counts will matter more this year than they have, especially if the candidates begin to split the vote. At some point, one candidate will cross a momentum threshold -- having won enough delegates -- and the nomination will be secure.
Florida Democrats, by hold a non-binding -- ok, there's a more neutral phrase -- primary, assume that their delegates will be restored before the convention (true), and that candidates and the media will mentally add Florida delegates to their score after Jan. 29, even though those delegates haven't been awarded yet.
Not be opaque, here, but we are literally dealing with a structuralist language problem.
Do delegates "exist" before they actually exist? Or do they come into being when the candidates summon them? And if they're taken away before they can be awarded, and later returned, where do they go in the meantime? If you can answer those questions, then you'll know whether Florida will matter or not.
Romney Internal Memo: We're Almost There...
These days, Mitt Romney's campaign is producing internal memos as fast as Chris Matthews produces boxing references.
The latest one to wend its way to the inbox is from senior strategist Alexander Gage. You can read the whole thing here, if you'd like, to avoid any filtering.)
Gage writes that the campaign is "entering the last leg of the final stretch of the race." And on that leg, there's a caution flag up. Mitt Romney, Gage writes, is not running a national campaign because there _is_ no national campaign.
[It] is important to remember that even then, we will not be measuring ourselves through the lens of national polls and we do not expect to be competitive in them.
More from Gage:
Looking at historical Gallup polls from previous election cycles, relatively-unknown candidates who succeed in the early states gain 16-40 points in national polls.
He also tries to set expectations for other candidates, pointing out that no Republican has won the nomination without winning either Iowa or New Hampshire. That's true, but the reference set is so small, it's hard to make any real argument from history.
Gov. Romney’s early state strategy has paid dividends thus far, but we should expect a tumultuous road ahead as the campaign accelerates.
The bottom line: Don't fret about Rudy's standing. Keep your focus on the early state polls. We'll get momentum when we win Iowa.
Direct Mail Fuels Rudy Rise In New Hampshire
Rudy Giuliani hasn't spent much time in New Hampshire and has yet to run television advertisements there, but his campaign has found other ways to grab voters attention.
According to New Hampshire Republicans, Giuliani has mailed at least seven glossy pamphlets to tens of thousands of Republicans and independents across the state. His campaign has also conducted several telephone surveys of voters there.
The Giuliani campaign declined to provide any information about their New Hampshire voter outreach strategy, and they would not say how much Giuliani has spent on direct mail. But filings with the Federal Election Commission show that the campaign's printing, postage and list rental expenses topped $3.5M for the first two quarters. Most of the money was directed to a well-regarded Texas mail mail vendor, Olsen and Shuvalov.
Giuliani's latest direct mail piece, received by one New Hampshire Republican on September 4, focuses entirely on illegal immigration. "I will end illegal immigration and secure our borders without amnesty," Giuliani is quoted as saying. Validators, like Florida attorney general Bill McCollum, are quoted in support.
In July, the campaign mailed a small poster featuring Giuliani's "12 Committments" on one side and quotes from political personalities on the other, myself included. In mid-August, it was a double-sided placard headlined "Strong Leader. Proven Results."
Bush Raises Money For The RNC; Presidential Trust Dinner Schedule
President George W. Bush writes the latest e-mail fundraising appeal on behalf of the Republican National Committee.
Here's an excerpt:
Winning the 2008 elections will be the toughest test our Party has faced since we won the White House and added to our numbers in both houses of Congress in 2004.
To accomplish our mission, Republicans must make clear how we will meet the challenges of defending America and extending our prosperity.
Republicans have a solid record when it comes to protecting the United States of America.
After the enemy attacked us, I vowed I would rally this nation and use our resources to protect you. And that is exactly what we have done. We have reformed our intelligence services to make sure we can find the enemy before they strike. We have fought to deny them safe haven in Afghanistan and Iraq so they cannot plan and plot again.
The fight for freedom in Iraq is the fight for the security of the United States of America and we must prevail. If we leave before the job is done, the enemy that attacked us would be emboldened. I believe if our candidates take the message of doing what is necessary to protect the American people, we will win in 2008.
Republicans also have a solid record when it comes to growing this economy.
Republicans cut taxes for everybody who pays taxes. We understand that if you have more money in your pocket to save, spend, or invest, the economy will grow.
If you look carefully at the budget the Democrats proposed, they want to return to the days of tax and spend. They will raise your taxes and figure out new ways to spend your money.
If our candidates remind the American voter that tax cuts have worked, that the economy is strong as a result of the tax cuts, and instead of raising taxes, we ought to make the tax cuts permanent, we will retake the U.S. House and Senate and hold the White House in 2008.
The RNC's Presidential Trust dinner is scheduled for Sept. 16 in Washington. All the candidates and President Bush will attend.
Romney Team Seeks To Calm Supporters About New Hampshire Drop
To tamp down any internal anxiety over the new CNN/WMUR poll showing Romney losing ground to rivals, Mitt Romney's campaign dived into the cross-tabs and distributed a memo to senior staff and some outside allies.
Here's a portion of that memo:
We are converting a higher proportion of our favorables into support than Giuliani. Gov. Romney’s ballot score is 35% of his favorable rating, while Giuliani’s ballot score is 31% of his favorable rating. Since April, Giuliani’s support as a percent of favorables has dropped from 41% to 31%, while Gov. Romney’s has grown from 29% to 35%.
Gov. Romney’s support is firmer than Giuliani’s. 68% of Giuliani voters say they are “still trying deciding” who to vote for, compared to 59% of Romney voters. Romney supporters are also more likely to be satisfied with the GOP field – 31% say they are “very satisfied” with the Republican candidates, compared to 23% of Giuliani voters.
Gov. Romney leads by 12 points among conservative voters. Gov. Romney leads Giuliani 28%-16% among self-described conservatives, who make up approximately 55% of the NH Republican primary electorate. No candidate has ever won the NH primary without winning conservatives—even in 2000, McCain edged Bush 37%-35% among conservatives.
Our support is based on our message—that Change Begins With Us. Giuliani’s support is based on electability75% of Romney voters say Romney is the candidate who will best “bring needed change to US,” compared to 57% of Giuliani voters who say Giuliani will be best to bring change. The attribute that unites the most Giuliani supporters is “most likely to win in November 2008” – 66% of Giuliani supporters say Giuliani best fits that description, the highest of any the attributes UNH tested.
"In New Hampshire, in overall polling Governor Romney has gone from 10 points down in January to ahead by four in September. Not a bad place to be," a Romney adviser said last night.
Romney has spent nearly $4.5M in New Hampshire so far. The recent polling "confirms what we always expected would emerge in New Hampshire: a close race," the adviser said.
I asked about the decision to use the unusually harrowing clip -- reportedly, McCain himself is uncomfortable with it -- and senior aide Mark Salter took an unusually direct swipe at Mitt Romney, "I don't know, I guess we could have gone with the first time he waterskiied past the sandbar but we thought this might say a little more about his character and love of country."
The God-o-Meter
Totally unscientific, provocative and slightly, deliciously offensive, Beliefnet's new God-o-Meter judges the candidates on a scale ranging form the theocratic to the secular.
This week, Mitt Romney scores an 8 out of 10, where "10" represents a theocrat of the Rousas John Rushdoony variety. and Bill Richardson, having decreed that God wants Iowa to go first, is right up there.
To get a zero, by the way, you'd have to channel Christopher Hitchens blasting Mother Theresa. The most secular Democrat: Chris Dodd. The most secular Republicans: Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson.
For example, I heard Senator Clinton say on Sunday that she wants to continue combat missions in Iraq. To me, that's a continuation of the war. I do not think we should continue combat missions in Iraq, and when I'm on a stage with the Republican nominee come the fall of 2008, I'm going to make it clear that I'm for ending the war.
Even though the presence of U.S. troops has served as an attractive target for terrorists, our eventual withdrawal will not remove the threat. As president, I will redeploy troops into Quick Reaction Forces outside of Iraq, to perform targeted missions against Al Qaeda cells and to prevent a genocide or regional spillover of a civil war.
That's exactly what Clinton proposes, unless Edwards means that his Quick Reaction Forces would NEVER set foot in Iraq again... which begs the question as to how they'd prevent a genocide if they were encamped in the mountains of Kurdistan or the sands of Saudi Arabia.
Update: Edwards spokesman Eric Schultz sends along this response:
"Senator Clinton keeps combat troops in Iraq. That means she continues the war. John Edwards will end the war. Being just a little bit better than the Republicans is not a good enough reason to be President of the United States
Obama Will Lose If He Doesn't Win Iowa. Or Will He?
In this, she's tweaking something Obama tells his donors at private fundraisers. If he wins Iowa, he wins it all.
And yet -- this isn't an accurate portrayal of Obama's strategy.
If he loses Iowa, he'll have $15 million dollars in the bank. New Hampshire voters are temperamentally opposed to ratifying Iowa's results, and many more independents will vote there. If Obama's New Hampshire team does its job right, they'll be fairly sticky. And then, a week later, comes South Carolina. And if Iowa was really the linchpin of the strategy, the campaign would not be spending millions to organize supporters in California.
True, Iowa is crucial, critical, even. But if Obama places a close second to Hillary Clinton, or a close second to John Edwards, he's not going to drop out.
Update: NBC's Carrie Dann e-mails:
For what it's worth, the Quad City times reporting on Michelle Obama's "it's over" quote is not entirely on point. Here's the verbate of what she said (I was at the event and quoted this in my morning dispatch today.)
Iowa will make the difference. If Barack doesn't win Iowa, it is just a dream. If we win Iowa, then we can move to the world as it should be. And we need your help in making that happen.
The Primary Calendar Begins To Fill Out, Finally
Though New Hampshire Secretary of State William Gardner hasn't set his date yet and flux seems to be the state of the primary calendar, there is, among the leading Democratic and Republican presidential candidates, remarkable unanimity about its most likely shape.
The Iowa Caucuses will move to Saturday, January 5.
Gardner will schedule New Hampshire's primary for Tuesday the 8th.
The Democratic National Committee will permit Nevada to move its caucuses to the 12th; the Republicans will probably follow suit.
Michigan Republicans will vote in a primary on Jan. 15; Democrats will vote in a non-delegate beauty contest. (Michigan will lose half its allotted GOP delegates).
South Carolina's Democrats will, with the DNC's permission, move their primary to Jan. 19 to coincide with the Republican primary that day.
And then Florida Republicans will vote on Jan. 29; the Democrats will participate in another non-delegate beauty contest. (Florida will lose half its allotted GOP delegates, triggering a rules change to winner-takes-all, which will benefit, obviously, the winner).
Tonight, Edwards and Clinton stood out against the mosaic.
Edwards was Edwards on Centrum Silver: straightforward, confident, clear, knowledgeable, thoroughly encased in his own frame. Ying to the yang of both Obama and Clinton; If you’re new to nomination politics, then you’d think Edwards – and not Obama – was Hillary Clinton’s main foil. The war. Social Security. Health care. Campaign ethics. Clinton didn't take the punch, but she did move to dodge them, which is a victory for JRE.
Clinton: She was arguably evasive on questions about Iran, Israel and nuclear weapons and on the options she’d consider to solve the Social Security short fall. She doesn’t want to give up her national security strategy or her presidential negotiating positions, but her opponents can exploit her refusal to be specific. These are presidential answers; they’re not campaign answers. Clinton was solid; she was not commanding, in part because she was forced on the defensive more tonight than in previous debates. She was thorough and careful, came off as intelligent and prudent, and really didn’t take a nick tonight. She did unleash the night’s best jab, and she displayed a genuine sense of humor, one that the audience seemed to appreciate and acknowledge.
Obama was Obama: collected, thoughtful, ready to make distinctions but unwilling to be ham-handed. Not so loquacious. A very serene presence tonight. At one point, Obama wielded a knife, chastising Clinton repeatedly for the secrecy which surrounded her 1993 health care effort, but the knife was blunt and its application was almost ninja-like.
Richardson was more animated than usual and seemed to have more time speaking.
Biden was talented, smart and amusing and blasted Rudy Giuliani, memorably.
Chris Dodd had no memorable moments.
The best answer of the night: one very prominent Republican said that Clinton gave it, when disagreeing with husband about a torture scenario – would she allow it if Al Q’s number three promised to reveal the location of a nuclear bomb.
Russert was sly, positing the scenario without identifying the author. Clinton took the bait. Russert revealed that the positor was William Jefferson Clinton. So “you disagree?” Russert asked. “Well he’s not standing here right now.”
Russert: “ So there is a disagreement?”
Clinton: “ Well, I’ll talk to him later.”
This Republican told me: “Best answer of the night. Smart and strong.”
Lightning Round
What does "time to turn the page" mean? Bushes, Clintons or both? "Ending the divisive politics..." i.e., HE WON'T ANSWER... "Turning the page means that we've got to get over the special interest driven policies that we've grown accustomed to." I'm loath to say that Obama missed an opportunity to be clear about what he means
Russert asks HRC the dynasty question. HRC, to applause: "I thought Bill was a pretty good president." But she's "running on my own."
Biden on MoveOn: "On some things, they've been positive... " But "It's not their party. They're part of the parties."
Dodd: Would he favor a temporary ban on all toys from China until we're convinced they're safe? "Yes."
Obama: Better to be in Washington trying to end the war than in Jena, but he has nothing to apologize for, he says.
Richardson: he'd rescind the Boy Scouts ban.
Ban Smoking Everywhere? Obama, HRC Say No; Everyone Else Yes
HRC: "We banned it in New York City..." and "business increased.." I "think that we should be moving toward a bill that I have supported to regulate tobacco.." . She's not in favor of a national law to ban smoking in all public places.
Obama: "Local communities are making enormous strides and they're making progress.." But if local laws don't work, "then I would" favor a national law.
Richardson, Gravel, Kucinich, Biden and Dodd would endorse a national law banning smoking.
Obama Campaign Sends Out Research Supporting Health Care Attack
Biden, Obama, Edwards Would Raise Social Security Taxes; HRC Won't Say
On Social Security:
Biden would raise taxes above the first $97,000. So would Edwards, although with a slight variation.
HRC won't say what she'd do -- she doesn't want to negotiate. What's on the table? Off the table? She'd establish a commission. A very cautious answer.
Obama: "I think that lifting the cap is probably going to be the best option." I.e, taxing more than the first $97,000.
Dodd and Richardson won't commit.
The Democrats Like Their Gays With Rights...
When HRC talked about tomorrow's ENDA vote, she said "I hope we'll all be there," which I think was a pointed reference to Obama's failure to attend votes today.
Here It Is: Obama Takes On HIllary BUT Actually Uses The Word "Process"
Obama: "I think Hillary Clinton deserves credit for having worked on health care... the issue is not going to be who has these particular plans, it has to do with who can inspire and mobilize America people."
Obama, on why HRC failed: "Part of the reason it was lonely people that you closed the door to a lot of potential allies in that process."
It's a sharp knife, but Obama is wielding it oh-so-carefully.
Russert Asks Obama The Experience Question.
Obama answers by citing his biography and resume.
When Biden Says "Old Stuff"
In, that, a new Clinton administration would bring back "Old Stuff," he's talking about "policy, policy."
So, not sex scandals.
Wow. Biden and Dodd Aren't Repeating Their Criticisms In Public
They can bash her behind her back, but they're too afraid to repeat their criticisms to her face.
HRC's Judgment
Misjudgments on the war and on health care... why shouldn't Democratic voters not trust her judgment?
Clinton's response is humble.
"I intend to be the health care president."
Bush's Endorsement of Clinton
Dodd: "If i were Hillary Clinton, I'd be very worried. This is the same guy who said "Way to go, Brownie."
Biden Boils Over, Blasts Giuliani
Biden: "Rudy Giuliani doesn't know what he's talking about. Rudy is the most uninformed person in American foreign policy now running for president."
Sanctuary Cities
Yay or nay?
Yay: Richardson answers first. He knows this issue pat. And no, not just because he's Hispanic.
Biden: (Yay) there's no federal enforcement. (Hey, that's Rudy's answer).
Biden: "Rudy Giuliani doesn't know what he's talking about. Rudy is the most uninformed person in American foreign policy now running for president."
Paging Tony Blair
Richardson: "There is no Middle East peace envoy."...
Huh?
Edwards Uses Lieberman-Kyl As Cudgel Against Clinton
Lieberman-Kyl gives Bush authority he should not have, Edwards says. Hint, hint, Hillary. How could you not learn your lesson?
How Long Before Giuliani Responds To The Iran Questions?
The clock is ticking, Maria Comella!
Israel and Syria
If Israel concluded that Iran's nuclear capability threatens Israel's security, would Israel be justified in bombing Iran?
HRC and Russert argue over hypotheticals... "What we think we know, is that, with North Korean help, both financial and technical...the Syrians were.. putting together a nuclear facility and the Israelis took it out. I strongly support that."
"I don't want to talk about what might or might not talk about what might happen with Iran."
Russert tries again.
"I'm not going to answer that."
Gravel and Kucinich wants to answer, but Clinton demonstrates her mastery of the issue.
Would HRC promise as a potential commander in chief that she would not allow Iran to be a nuclear power and would do everything to stop it?
She would do "everything in power to prevent" that eventuality. But she won't meet Russert's premise.
Russert asks the questions of Obama: "I think it's important to back up for a second and just understand. Iran is in a strong position now than before the Iraq war because the Congress authorized the president to go in."
So -- will he answer every question by reminding the audience of his opposition to the war?
Positioning, Hillary and Iran
Gravel's next to Clinton and is swinging his arms at her..making her the focus of his criticism of the Senate... "fantasy land..." Gravel is "ashamed of you, Hillary" for voting for Lieberman-Kyl, which would designate the Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist organization.
Clinton responds by... laughing! It works! The crowd murmurs. She defends her vote. It's not about war, it's about sanctions.
But -- isn't that what she's said about her thoughts about the 2003 Iran vote?
Russert Has Lots Of Time On His Hands
To Mike Gravel: "I've listened to you very carefully in this campaign.."
Russert Must Have Scared The Hell Out Of The Audience
No one is cheering, clapping, booing.
A Great New Biden Talking Point
"The Biden plan, which got 75% of the vote in Congress..."
The Democratic Matryoska
Obama answers and draws contrasts with Clinton
Clinton answers
Edwards answers and draws contrasts with Obama and Clinton
Richardson answers and draws contrasts with Edwards, Clinton and Obama
Dodd answers and draws contrasts with Edwards, Clinton, Obama and Richardson. (He'd have all troops out by 2013).
Biden answers and draws contrasts with E,C,O,R. and D. Yes, there IS a political solution. Congress voted to endorse MY political solution today.
The problem with all these nested distinctions is that it's hard for any one distinction or distinguisher to break through.
Combat Missions
Edwards begins to draw a distinction with Sen. Clinton for endorsing new combat missions... with Clinton clarifies...she meant counterterrorism missions.... Edwards repeated his point...withdrawing all combat troops...
So -- genocide? Would Edwards put troops back in?
American and the world should act together, he said.
Hard to see the distinction Edwards is making here. It's not very clear.
The Limits Of Presidential Power
Even Edwards can't promise to withdraw completely at 2013.
The Democratic presidential candidates are severely constrained and will be constrained.
President Bush will be powerful long beyond his term.
Getting The Troops Out
Russert's first question sets the tone...the first task faced by the new president will be to redeploy troops...Obama's answer is the same answer that Hillary Clinton will give, which is that there ought to be a careful and well-managed withdrawal under the aegis of the joint chiefs.
Russert asks a classic trick question, seeking a "pledge" to have all troops out of Iraq by 2013 set date, and Obama, smartly, won't indulge him.
Clinton: "I agree with Barack. It is very difficult to know what we're going to be inheriting."
A huge opening for an opponent to exploit...
The Debate Begins
The Democrats latest pinata party is hosted by Tim Russert, a narrator who ordinarily would appear in the grand finale, as opposed to the end of first act, but no matter.
Bill Clinton Addresses The Dynasty Question
On tonight's "World News" with Charles Gibson, President Clinton is asked about the politics of dynasty, as very deliberately raised by George W. Bush.
Gibson: President Bush recently, sort of mused about, about presidential succession. And said, huh, interesting, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton. And used the word "dynasty." Is that good?
Clinton: In our case, I don't think dynasty is right, because, Hillary, will win -- have to win on her own merits. And I believe that, on the merits, I think she's the best qualified non-incumbent I've had a chance to vote for in 40 years as a voter…
The fact that we happen to have been married, I don't think should disqualify her…If you go out and you fight fair, and you win it on your own, that's not a dynasty. She gets elected this time, it's not going to be, you're not going out to vote for me for a third term. She's going to get elected, she'll be the President, she'll make the calls, the rest of us will have to do our best to help her succeed…No, dynasties are not good for America, but it wouldn't be good for America to eliminate someone in consideration, because of what their last name was.
It's her turn. Or is it?
Club For Growth Seeks Clarification From Giuliani On Social Security Tax
The Club for Growth wants to know whether Rudy Giuliani really intends to keep Social Security solvency tax hikes on the table. Responding to an AP interview where Giuliani "refused to rule out raising taxes to offset a Social Security short fall."
"Such an allegation, if true, together with your refusal to sign Americans for Tax Reform’s anti-tax pledge, casts doubt on your commitment to opposing all tax increases," CFG president Pat Toomey writes. "We urge you to explicitly rule out raising taxes as part of any Social Security remedies." Toomey ends the letter by seeking a "clarification" from Giuliani.
In the network of right-leaning interest groups, the Club has been particularly aggressive in publicly vetting the Republican presidential candidates. They've issued detailed white papers about the candidates' record on fiscal policy. And they detest Mike Huckabee; the feeling is mutual.
Beginning Of The McCain Surge?
So -- the media tore McCain down, and now we'll begin to pick him up. We'll start to use words like "surge," "rising," "momentum." His campaign staff will send our clips, complete with praiseworthy adjectives, to donors, who will, in turn, open their paypall accounts for McCain.
1. This may be an outlier. Or it may be a valid snapshot of public opinion.
2. If it's not an outlier, you're seeing the beginning of a John McCain bump, some of it natural, some of it earned. A rival campaign strategist told me, "He’s hit his cellar and the time he’s spending in NH is paying off. I think his basement is around 12 and he can only grow from there which is what we’re seeing."
3. Mitt Romney's campaign will probably respond to the poll by not responding, lest they betray any panic. They probably aren't panicking: Romney's internal surveys do not show a drop-off. Indeed, even in the CNN poll, Romney's favorables are up, and a full two thirds of the electorate says they are undecided. Giuliani is more likeable and more electable, according to these voters, than Romney is, but Romney brings more change and more experience than Giuliani does.
4. What's all this about Rudy Giuliani ignoring New Hampshire and the early states? He hasn't stepped up his visits to the Granite State, so what's responsible for his (smallish, within the MOE) increase?
The Rest Of The Stories, 9/26
Rudy Giuliani fires his deputy campaign finance director, Anne Dunsmore, a few days before the end of the quarter. That suggests he'll lag behind ex-MA Gov. Mitt Romney in fundraising. It also reflects the fact that Giuliani still has no natural fundraising base and never developed one.
As we first reported last week, John McCain will launch his first television and radio ad blitz... in New Hampshire.
Will Newt run? Watch Rich Galen. He's a senior adviser to Fred Thompson. He is also one of Newt Gingrich's closest friends. It's probably true that Galen would not have signed on with Fred Thompson had he expected Gingrich to run.
Fred Thompson plans a three-day swing through Iowa next week.
It's better to be hated than liked, especially when you start a presidential campaign, Chuck Todd writes.
Joe Biden's Iowa Strategy
On a wall in Sen. Joe Biden’s headquarters, a map of Iowa is obscured by dozens of small blue and red dots. Each dot represents a personal visit by Biden’s chief surrogate, sister Valerie Biden Owens, to a top-tier Iowa locale. Caucus math the way it is, smaller Democratic towns often get the most attention.
To win in Iowa, Biden will throw everything into it. His campaign advisers insist that they planned this approach all along. Iowa is, they say, the perfect state for him: the caucus goers are older, they’re receptive to a sophisticated message about the Iraq war, and they reward personal contact.
Biden polls at around five percent right now. But political prognosticators and many Iowa Democrats are buzzing about a coming Biden surge. They believe he is working his way to a stronger finish in Iowa than many of his rivals anticipate. He has nine legislative endorsements, an impressive feat for a field that includes two superstars (Clinton and Obama) and one adopted son (John Edwards). Two of them are very good gets: Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy and Speaker Pro Tempore Polly Butka.
“We’re setting the sail now and we expect the wind to start hitting in November and December,” says Danny O’Brien, Biden’s political director and new Iowa state director.
Trace Biden’s devotion to Iowa to March of 2006, when Iowa state representatives brief him on their plan to retake the state house in November’s election. That August, Biden spent 14 days in the state, attending more than 40 campaign events for legislatures. Not only would Biden help them raise money, he’d also give them advice – message advice – how to talk about the Iraq war and the Bush administration.
After he announced his presidential bid, Biden’s team drew up a five-point plan to win legislative endorsements. First, Biden would ask state legislators to let him host an event. No endorsement needed, just an event. Then he’d ask the legislators to judge for themselves how their constituents responded to Biden. Third, he’s stress his Iraq message – “a broader policy offering than they normally expected,” O’Brien says. Fourth, he’d stress electability, drawing an implicit contrast with other Democrats in the race. Iowa Democrats, Biden and his aides believes, are hair-trigger-sensitive to electability arguments. And fifth, he’d work as many rooms as he could, focusing on delegate-rich areas and exploiting resevoirs of support that exist from 1988 last sojourn as a presidential candidate.
These include blue collar cities like Davenport and Dubuque and a wide strip of towns along the Mississippi river.
Biden deliberately chooses not to pander to the party’s liberal base, which his staff believes is a lot smaller than their loud voices would indicate.
The operation is pretty lean; there’s very little excess fat. But Biden will have manage to visit all 99 counties by early November. He has nine field offices and 23 full-time staffers – more than some Democrats (and Rudy Giuliani) but fewer, by orders of magnitude, than Barack Obama, John Edwards and Hillary Clinton.
The final arrow in Biden’s quiver may be his persuasive ability. From the start, his campaign has targeted high-profile newspaper endorsements. Biden first met with editors at the Des Moines Register, the Quad Cities Times, the Dubuque Telegraph Herald and the Cedar Rapids Gazette early in 2006.
So far, Biden has run only one television ad in the state and is saving money to target key markets in December and early January. A figure of some celebrity, he will rely on his public image to keep him on television until then.
A political cartoon from Sage Stossel, the editor of Atlantic Online.
For Social Security Fix, Are Taxes On The Table For Giuliani?
Buried in an AP interview yesterday was this interesting exchange about ex-Mayor Rudy Giuliani's principles for shoring up entitlements:
Giuliani: … refused to rule out raising taxes to offset a Social Security shortfall. He said he would assemble a bipartisan group to develop ideas for fixing Social Security, perhaps even before his inauguration. "I am opposed to tax increases, but I would look at whatever proposal they came up with and try to figure out how we can come up with a bipartisan way to do it,'' Giuliani said, adding that potential solutions must come from both parties. "The reality is, I'm more concerned about Medicare and Medicaid than I am with Social Security, because I'm pretty sure we can solve Social Security.''
Political Meme Watch: Where's The Obama Who Inspires Us?
Joe Klein has been here, and today, the Washington Post's Ruth Marcus takes charge of this meme.
The question about Obama is not "where's the beef," Mondale's famous putdown of Gary Hart's "new ideas." It's: Where's the audacity?
But Obama is not a policy radical, never was. He's a process radical.
Romney To Speak At Council For National Policy
Kudos to Mitt Romney's team for putting his meeting with the Council for National Policy on the campaign schedule. The CNP is a redoubt of earnest conservative hardliners, intellectual warriors of the Cold War, assorted fringe figures and major Republican fundraisers. It is also very private and doesn't like to publicize the fact or location of its meetings.
Before Sen. Fred Thompson entered the race officially, he was a favorite of the CNP, and executive director Steve Baldwin was said to be pressing other CNP members to give Thompson a close look. (Thompson spoke to the CNP's Spring conference in Washington).
CNP seeded Pat Buchanan's protest presidential candidacy in 1992; if there's a third party movement to challenge Rudy Giuliani's nomination, it'll probably be born here, too.
September 25, 2007
The Rest Of The Stories, 9/25
Gov. Mike Huckabee's Vertical Day brought 35,000 eyeballs to his campaign website and a nice amount of late-in-the-quarter donations too. Huckabee's fundraising totals won't pop those eyes, but the campaign says it's happy with its 3rd quarter tallies. They wouldn't, however, give me a preview of the actual numbers.
This feud between the Southern Baptist Convention's Richard Land and Focus on the Family's James Dobson is about a lot more than a spat over Fred Thompson.
ABC's Jake Tapper gets J.C. Watts to call Republicans "stupid" for skipping the Tavis Smiley debate... er, the "black" debate.
Fred Thompson claimed 12 legislative endorsements in South Carolina today, in addition to the already-endorsed Rep. Gresham Barrett. Thompson appears on Sean Hannity today. But shouldn't Thompson be in South Carolina to collect the endorsements? Some anonymous ne'er-do-well is attacking Thompson again.
The RNC purchased banner ads on 39 New Hampshire and national political websites in advance of Wednesday night's Democratic debate. Here, you can play a make-fun-of-the-Democrats game. The banner ad shows only two Dems: Clinton and Obama. Are they not a-feared of Edwards?
Rudy Giuliani picked up the endorsement of former Illinois Attorney General Jim Ryan. Illinois is (a) 2/5 state and a general election state the Giuliani campaign thinks they can put in play.
Apparently, poststructuralists at Columbia agree: there aren't any gays in Iran.
The Supreme Court agreed to take a challenge to an Indiana voter photo identification law. They'll decide in time for 2008 -- in theory.
Worried About '08, Republican Party Taps Candidates For Money
The Republican National Committee has asked the Republican presidential candidates to sign a joint letter to donors urging them to raise money for the RNC's presidential trust dinner, its biggest fundraising event in early 2008.
As of yesterday, four Republicans had signed on -- ex-NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Gov. Mitt Romney, Rep. Ron Paul and Ex-Sen. Fred Thompson. (A spokesman for Romney said the campaign had agreed "in principle" to participate but was waiting to learn more details).
“The RNC is working with the presidential campaigns to maximize opportunities with donors to ensure Republican candidates up and down the ticket have the necessary resources to communicate our message next fall," said Danny Diaz, the RNC's communications director.
A senior consultant to a Republican presidential campaign said that the party was moved to act now because they worry that Republicans will lag behind the combined efforts of the Democratic National Committee and the Democratic candidate in 2008.
The RNC outraises the DNC month-by-month, but Republicans expect the Democratic presidential nominee to raise more than the Republican nominee. The consultant said that the RNC wanted to tap some of the donation bundlers recruited by the Republican candidates.
As of the end of August, the RNC reported $16M in the bank compared with the DNC's $2M.
Both parties' nominees are likely to opt out of the public financing system for the general election, so the parties themselves will play a subordinate role; the candidates will be free to raise and spend as much as they can legally accumulate.
A Last Post On Fundraising Before The Quarter Ends
Two fundraising quarters, the same story. The political world expects Hillary Clinton to raise more money than Barack Obama. Hillary Clinton's advisers downplay expectations. Obama's advisers say nothing. Barack Obama outraises Hillary Clinton. The political world justifably rewards Obama for toppling the collosus.
This quarter: Hillary Clinton's team is downplaying expectations, suggesting to an ABC News reporter that she'll raise between $17M and $20M for the primary. (She'll also wind up raising between $3M and $5M for the general election).
Barack Obama's campaign is mum, although they deride the Clinton's expectations setting.
Here's a guess, based on the two previous cycles of expectations setting: Obama may outraise Clinton again. Or the two candidates will raise roughly the same amount.
At this point, the fundraising race is about stamina and spending. Both Clinton and Obama will have more than enough money to compete through Feb. 5.
And note: whoever wins the nomination, a merger of the Clinton-Obama fundraising organizations will give the Democrats an enormous advantage over the Republican nominee.
Richardson's Anti-War Bet
In his latest television ad, NM Gov. Bill Richardson is betting that three anti-war bloggers can convince Iowa Democrats that only his position on the war is pure enough.
"Clinton, Obama and Edwards all say they want to end the war in Iraq. But they support leaving thousands, even tens of thousands of troops behind," says OpenLeft's Matt Stoller.
"Bill Richardson is the only one who would actually end the war," says Christina Siun O'Connell, who blogs are Firedoglake
Richardson's ad comes days after some Democrats began to detect a distinct tone-shift in Sen. Hillary Clinton's utterances about troop withdrawal. Its content represents a bet that Democratic voters will favor the candidate who will withdraw the troops the quickest, consequences be damned.
Florida Republicans Use Democrats' Spat To Convert Voters
This is the title slide of a direct mail piece that Florida Republicans are sending out to Democrats today.
"Bottom line is, the Democrat POTUS candidates have said that from here on out they will be coming in to Florida to raise money and that’s it," said Erin Van Sickle, the state party spokesperson. "No talking to voters, no campaign events. ... This mail piece seeks to illustrate that and let voters know there is an alternative."
The mailing includes a voter registration form.
Obama Has Spent Nearly $3M On Iowa Ads
According to a tally provided by a Democrat who monitors campaign expenditures in Iowa, Sen. Barack Obama has spent $2.8M on television and radio advertising since June 25, when he first aired two biographical ads in markets across the state. His return on investment is debatable.
Obama's $2.8M traffic total is by far the highest among Democrats.
Former Sen. John Edwards has spent a paltry $23,000. Where Edwards used to lead the state by margins in the high-single digits, he is now locked in a three way race with Clinton and Obama.
But Obama's ad spending has not influenced the preferences of the universe of voters who are generally sampled for surveys. His support has been steady, hovering at around 20 percent since June. Obama's aides contend that conventional polling understates Obama's support, that his strategy and message will bring tens of thousands of new voters to caucus, and that voters in Iowa still don't know enough about him to evaluate him next to Clinton and Edwards.
N.M. Gov. Bill Richardson, who began to advertise on April 20, has spent more than $1.7M. He now polls in the low double digits, up from the high single digits.
Sen. Hillary Clinton has spent about $1.2M. Her first Iowa ad, reinforcing her "invisibles" message, aired in August. Several recent polls gives Clinton a slight edge in the state, although there is, as of yet, no consistent trend in her direction.
Sen. Chris Dodd has spent $739,000, and Sen. Joe Biden has spent about $313,000.
At this point in the 2004 cycle, Edwards had spent the most -- about $806,000, followed by Sen. John Kerry, who had spent $558,000. Gov. Howard Dean and Rep. Dick Gephardt had each spent about $350. Dean wound up spending $3.6M on Iowa media before his third place caucus finish, followed by Kerry, the winner, who spent $3M.
Sources close to the union and to the company are confident that the strike will be short, and UAW, in particular, is waving off the presidential candidates from spending too much time making bold indictments about General Motors. The UAW wants its contract; it doesn't want Democrats to add a partisan dimension to the negotiations.
The fact is, UAW's relationship with GM is about as good as it gets, the strike notwithstanding.
SlateV's Suggested Romney Commercials
White House Race Rankings: Everything's Coming Up Rudy
We're down to five plausible nominees and four candidates whose presence in the race lacks a purpose. Rudy Giuliani remains No. 1, in part because he's the only candidate of the top three who seems to have struck a good balance between strategy and personality.
These rankings are ordered by likelihood of winning the Republican primary and are based on a number of factors, including organization, money, buzz and polling. Click here for Democratic rankings.
RUDY GIULIANI -- He's had a great two weeks: acting like a president in London; aggressively challenging MoveOn and therefore burnishing his anti-liberal, tough-guy image; and going before the critical (and critical) National Rifle Association. And his opponents aren't lifting a finger. It's remarkable how easily they're letting Giuliani define the contours of the Republican race. BTW: Will any major Christian conservative leader endorse Giuliani before the primaries begin? If none do, what does that say about the state of the movement?
FRED THOMPSON -- Thompson has lost the elite primary, but he's OK with grassroots Republicans so far. Which one is the trailing indicator? Can anyone tighten him up on the stump? His gaffes come one after the other, he often contradicts himself from one thought to the next, and the national press coverage has been savage. The Florida trip was a disaster; there's no sugarcoating it. An electorate begging for authencity isn't going to buy the notion that he didn't know much about the Terri Schiavo situation. And the Everglades oil drilling comment was just bizarre.
One of the reasons I try not to fill this column with giblets from polls is that most polling concerns are Cheney-esqe about disclosing their methodology. Absent real knowledge of the voter screen, the winnowed universes, the exact wording of the questions and demographics, I'd be better off with a divining rod.
"Proprietary information" is occasionally cited as the reason for nondisclosure. But that's a sham. It's like a case officer refusing to tell an analyst anything about the source of an intelligence tip, leaving the analyst with no background information to judge the validity of the information.
Good polling is background dependent; you cannot analyze a poll's results without understanding the built-in prejudices of the survey itself.
Starting today we will begin to formally request answers to a limited but fundamental set of methodological questions for every public poll asking about the primary election released in, for now, a limited set of states: Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina or for the nation as a whole. We are starting today with requests emailed to the Iowa pollsters and will work our way through the other early states and national polls over the next few weeks, expanding to other states as our time and resources allow.
Romney's Make Your Own Ad Contest Is Down To Nine Finalists
Later this morning, Mitt Romney's campaign will unveil the nine finalists in its inaugural make-your-own ad campaign. Out of hundreds of submissions, the campaign has winnowed the field to nine, and Romney supporters can pick the one they want the Romney campaign to broadcast. And the campaign promises to air the ad in rotation, although they won't say where, or when.
To prevent vote-rigging, voters are required to provide their e-mail addresses.
Some of the finalists are cute -- there's one with Romney and his grandkids. Others are picturesque -- there are lots of New Hampshire scenery shots. One quotes my National Journal colleague Charlie Cook, so I'll probably vote for it. One is... YouTube-y.
So far, Romney has spent almost $10M on television and radio ads.
About 55% Of SEIU's Members Preferred John Edwards
In Chicago, The Change to Win union federation meets today to vet Democratic presidential candidates, and like so many other union conclaves this year, a joint endorsement is unlikely. That no doubt frustates Ex-Sen. John Edwards's campaign, but they can some solace from the fact that at the SEIU member straw poll in Washington last week, Edwards received the support of some 55% of the members, according to labor and political officials.
Tallies for Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. Hillary Clinton were not available, although SEIU officials have implied that Obama placed second and Clinton placed third.
The New York Times's Steven Greenhouse explains the simple mathematics: though a majority of the SEIU board -- and even the CTW executive committee -- may prefer Sen. Edwards, the membership is sufficiently divided. A bare majority is not enough; a supermajority is needed in order to ratify the preferences of SEIU members.
XM's POTUS '08 Channel
XM Satellite Radio has launched a free 24/7 channel devoted to presidential politics.
Why am I plugging a private enterprise? Because National Journal, a cousin company, has partnered with XM, and you can hear live reports from NBC/NJ's campaign reporters throughout the day.
They even allowed me to bloviate for 20 minutes.
September 24, 2007
Just Noticing...
Though more folks looked at Sen. Hillary Clinton's submission to the Yahoo/Huffington Post debate, Sen. Barack Obama "won" the mash-up.
Does this augur anything about head-to-head advertising?
Is Rudy Paying Lip Service To Iowa?
The Giuliani's campaign's nomination strategy is delegate-based. It begins with a win in one of the early primary states, proceeds to take some proportionally allocated delegates from others, gets delegates from Michigan, surprises the world by placing second in South Carolina (maybe), wins all of Florida's delegates and then romps to victory on Feb. 5.
Winning Iowa isn't as important.
Giuliani did not visit Iowa at all in September. He was last in the state on Aug. 24, when he made a virtually unannounced pit stop in Moline on the way back from finance events in California. Before that, Giuliani spent three days in the state -- Aug. 6 through 8th -- right before the Ames straw poll. His campaign has run two radio ads on rotation throughout the state.
Maria Comella, an Iowa veteran who serves as Giuliani's national press secretary, told me: "At this point in time, a lot of the calendar is being driven as we approach the end of the third quarter by fundraising. The fact is that organizationally, we’re very strong in Iowa. Our political staff here at headquarters is spending quite a bit of time in Iowa. As we move in October, you’re going to see a lot of staff spend time there and the mayor will be back there as well."
Still, Mitt Romney has spent 300% more time in Iowa that Giuliani, as has Sen. Sam Brownback. Even Sen. John McCain, who skipped the Iowa caucuses in 200, has spent 5 more days in the state than Giuliani.
Giuliani's campaign will never admit that winning Iowa is not a necessary hurdle for their strategy to clear -- Iowans are nothing if not vain about making sure that candidates not only take them seriously, but put enough resources in the state in order to give that appearance. Giuliani, therefore, has to cross a threshold, but he doesn't have to exceed it. Also: it’s true that Giuliani wants to win Iowa; his campaign therefore is putting in more resources than is required to give the appearance of competition there… but fewer resources than they would if Iowa was a must-win state. If Mitt Romney falters, Giuliani's campaign wants to be able to build a large enough net to capture his supporters.
Edwards Wins DailyKos Straw Poll -- For The Zillionth Month In A Row
How representative is the Kos readership of the Netroots? Are Kos straw poll voters representative of Kos's readership?
Hillary Clinton's First South Carolina Radio Ad Targets Black Women
Sen. Hillary Clinton is up with a radio ad in South Carolina today, her first. A few things of note:
## It's targeted at African American women. She purchased 140 gross ratings points in Florence, 165 points in Chucktown, 400 in the capital of Columbia, and 180 in Greenville. It's estimated to have cost the campaign about $40,000.
## The ad references the Corridor of Shame, an underfunded, underperforming, largely minority stretch of rural school districts along I-95 in South Carolina.
## It keeps with the "Invisibles" theme that Clinton has employed in the early primary states. October is Invisibles month for the Clinton campaign, so expect to hear a lot more from Clinton on the subject.
## In South Carolina, undecided black women will probably determine the outcome of the primary. A recent poll of the African American electorate in South Carolina suggests that Clinton may be losing some ground to Obama.
Anncr: Hillary Clinton has spent her life standing up for people others don’t see.
Hillary: Too many Americans today feel as though they are invisible... If you are a child in a crumbling school along the Corridor of Shame, you ARE invisible to this president.
Anncr: Thirty-five years as a tireless advocate for children and families…
Hillary: If you’re a mother without health care, a father without a job, a family that can’t get by on the minimum wage... you’re invisible as well.
Anncr: Time and again, Hillary Clinton has stood up to President Bush…stood up FOR us.Hillary: And if you’re stuck on a rooftop or stranded in the Superdome during a hurricane you’re invisible to this president even when you’re on CNN. Well, you are not invisible to me, and you should never be invisible to the president of the United States.
Anncr: Hillary Clinton. If you’re ready for change. She’s ready to lead. Paid for by Hillary Clinton for President.
Disclaimer: I’m Hillary Clinton and I approve this message.
The Rest Of The Stories, September 24
The Republican National Committee welcomes back Danny Diaz as its new communications director, vice Lisa Miller, who left last week to join the private sector. Diaz formerly worked for Sen. John McCain's presidential bid and was director of regional press for the RNC during the 2006 cycle. He's also a vet of the Bush-Cheney campaign.
On the day of Ahmadinejad's visit, Mitt Romney unveiled an ad touting his refusal to provide state police escorts to a former Iranian president who wanted to speak at Harvard. His change message is also getting some traction.
The New York Times admits a politically inexcusable, factually inexplicable mistake about its MoveOn.org ad.
Sen. Evan Bayh endorses Hillary Clinton. The the tax-cutting former Indiana governor bought himself a ticket to the veeptstakes.
New York City's 9,000 corrections officers endorsed Barack Obama.
In Washington, D.C. John Edwards unveiled a policy to fight HIV/AIDS.
Chris Dodd was the first presidential candidate to respond to the United Auto Workers' decision to strike.
Crime Rises. What Say You, Presidential Candidates?
Who's going to unveil the first tough-on-crime platform?
Violent crime rose by nearly 2% over 2005, and I suspect that these figures always understate the situation a bit.
Giuliani's End Of Quarter House Parties: " It ain't over 'til it's over "
Mitt Romney has his Rally for Romneys, Fred Thompson has his... well, surely he has something, and Rudy Giuliani is employing the house party model to generate fundraising and political momentum at the end of the third fundraising quarter.
On Wednesday, supporters will host more than hundreds of house parties across the country. The goal, according to a campaign aide, is to "reach out to a different set of supporters who aren't necessarily part of the fundraising universe. These are the folks who are supporters but who don't attend fundraisers... maybe they've donated, but they are driven more by politics than anything else."
Giuliani will host a live, 15-minute webcast on Wednesday night at 8:30 ET and he'll attend a house party in New Jersey with Yogi Berra.
Party hosts will manage their fundraising tallies by logging on to Giuliani's website.
Swift Boating Rudy? Probably Won't Work.
First, why does the president of the new 9/11 Parents and Families of Firefighters and WTC Victims use the verb "swift boat?" To almost everyone, that verb implies an unfair tarnishing.
A coalition of 9/11 families and rescue workers plans to continue efforts to derail former Mayor Rudy Giuliani's bid for President at a midtown fund-raiser today.
The group will to use the same strategy that helped undermine 2004 Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry, whose service in Vietnam was challenged by the pro-Bush Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
Well -- for months before the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ran its ads, the Bush Campaign had pounded the message that John Kerry was weak, vaccilating and effete; that he was not strong enough to handle the challenges of a post 9/11 environment; that he flip-flopped on the war. The SBVFT ads came on the scene as Republicans and Democrats were fully divided, in their own camps, energized and ready for partisan warfare.
The ads questioning Kerry's military record were specious and unfair, but they succeeding in generating reams of earned media. The second wave of ads were broadcast to a much broader audience and showed footage of Kerry questioning the conduct of American soldiers in Vietnam. Republicans say that the latter tranche of ads succeeded in moving the numbers.
Rudy Giuliani's relationship with the American people was cemented after 9/11, unfolded and grown in real-time, unmediated by partisans. It is extraordinarily difficult to convince Americans, who saw with their own eyes and heard with their own ears the leadership skills of Giuliani after 9/11 that he is somehow responsible for failing to stand up for firefighters and WTC families.
The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ads were unfair but they reinforced a stereotype held by the political elites; the anti-Giuliani ads are at odds with the recieved wisdom, and therefore face much greater obstacles.**
The exception is in New York City, where Giuliani is less popular than he is almost everywhere else, a consequence of New Yorkers having spent years learning who Giuliani was and being able to judge his 9/11 performance in light of what happened before -- and after.
Obama's Search For the Higgs Boson
Barack Obama's presidential campaign is predicated on a new model of political physics, one where organization channels and directs enthusiasm . It's a bright new theory of nomination politics, one invented to account for the curious mix of insurgent messaging with fundraising muscle.
Obama's campaign reminds me of the physicists at CERN. For years they've positied that that tiny vibrations of energetic strings give rise to everything in the known universe. The missing link is the Higgs Boson -- a fabled particle that gives all the other particles their mass. If the Large Hadron Collider -- the newest CERN mega-particle collider -- finds the Higgs Boson, the Standard Model will have to be drastically revised.
The Standard Model of the Democratic Primary provides no comfort for non-establishment candidates. In 2004, Howard Dean's insurgent model failed for reasons still debated by us amateur scientists.
There are reasons to believe, however, Obama is much more suited to find the fabled Higgs Boson -- to figure out this new model in a way Dean could not.
Where Howard Dean discovered the war on the campaign trail and originally intended to run as a technocratic health care candidate, Obama was in many ways pulled into the race by a strong force at the nucleus of the Democratic Party, just like Ronald Reagan was pulled into the center of the Republican Party by the conservative movement.
In private, Obama likens himself to Reagan, according to some of his friends. He believes that the very act of Americans choosing to elect him would amount to the biggest foreign policy advance of the past 20 years, would immediately change the way, say, a young boy in Lahore views this country, would crush the propaganda gains of radical Islam since the end of the first Gulf War, would heal the scar that serves as a reminder of America's original sin (slavery), would directly engage the mass Muslim world in a way that no one who voted for oil or empire could, and ... you get the idea.
Other differences between Dean and Obama: the Dean campaign's Netroots orientation drove its organization; Obama's campaign's use of the technology is more focused and instramental. The technology itself was new in 2003; it has matured significantly since then. Dean trained his young Iowa volunteers in caucus math late in the game; Already, Obama has held dozens of trainings for his.
Aftrer the jump, read a memo by Obama campaign manager David Plouffe that does not rely upon an extend physics metaphor to make this argument.
Here's What A Fred Thompson Robo-Fundraising Call Sounds Like
This audio recording of a Fred Thompson fundraising telephone call was passed along by a major fundraiser for Mitt Romney, suggesting that Thompson is prospecting for donors among those Republicans already committed to other candidates... just in case they're having second thoughts.
This is Fred Thompson. I'm privileged to be speaking to you today. I'm calling today to personally tell you that I am a candidate for the president of the United States, and now that we'm in, we intend to win and set a course for new leadership in Washington. We'll provide the type of leadership that will put power back in the hands of folks like you and most importantly reassert the conept that government in Washington is the surrogate of the people, not the reverse.The type of leadership that combines solid conservative principles with good old-fashioned, common sense.
One of the reasons I decided to seek the presidency was that I've been traveling this country, and I've been troubled to find that good people whp pay their taxes and play by the rules have grown weary and even cynical anbout the political process and the politicians we've sent to Washington.
It's a challenging time for our country, and the task ahead of us will be challenging as well. But with the help of the folks like you, we will make a difference. Now, if that sounds good to you,
I'd be deeply humbled and honored if you'd see fit and join our team and be a part of our campaign. I'm thankful for the time you've given me today, and I respectfully ask that you hold the line for a just a moment longer and one of my assistants will tell you how to join our team. Thanks for listening.
The Synthetic Outrage Files
It's fair to assume that, anytime a politician uses the phrase "refuse to condemn" or one of its variants, the outrage behind the utterance is probably contrived so as to stoke fears and prejudices.
The phrase usually arises when someone or entity ; the other party pounces, not because they're really outraged (they are not), but because they believe that outrage rallies the troops. There's a circular logic employed, too. If you don't join the cavalcade of outrage, then you can be accused of "refusing to condemn" something.
The comment itself may indeed be offensive, but it does not follow that folks who are associated with the comment-maker have any duty to condemn, much less even mention the comments, especially because, when they do, they're playing onto the turf claimed by those outraged at the comments.
Therefore, the outrage directed at those who REFUSE TO CONDEMN something is logically synthetic. Of course they're NOT outraged. They're DELIGHTED, because they get to whip their opponents over the head with it.
It's the wimpiest form of guilt by association there is.
For example: liberals contrived outrage when John Boehner said this: "We need to continue our effort here because, Wolf, long term, the investment that we're making today will be a small price if we're able to stop Al-Qaida here, if we're able to stabilize the Middle East." Republicans, Sen. John Kerry said, should condemn Mr. Boehner.
And Republicans are outraged that Democrats refused to condemn the MoveOn.org ad and, now, Mitt Romney claims to be outraged that Hillary Clinton has nothing to say about the president of Iran's visit to Columbia.
Senator Clinton's refusal to denounce Columbia University for inviting Ahmadinejad to speak demonstrates weakness
The corrollary: when partisans claim that their rivals are hypocrites because they don't condemn every conceivable outrage.
Obama
In a conference call this morning, Obama's campaign manager, David Plouffe, announced that the campaign was endorsed by Gordon Fischer, the well-regarded former chair of the Iowa Democratic Party.
But that really wasn't the reason for the conference call. Rather, the campaign wanted to give Plouffe and Fischer a chance to explain Obama's caucus strategy for reporters.
"We need to couple the grassroots enthusiasm we have with people who know how to do the caucus," Plouffe said.
Romney's Make Your Own Ad Contest Is Down To Nine Finalists
Later this morning, Mitt Romney's campaign will unveil the nine finalists in its inaugural make-your-own ad campaign. Out of hundreds of submissions, the campaign has winnowed the field to nine, and Romney supporters can pick the one they want the Romney campaign to broadcast. And the campaign promises to air the ad in rotation, although they won't say where, or when.
To prevent multiple votes, voters are required to provide their e-mail addresses.
Some of the finalists are cute -- there's one with Romney and his grandkids. Others are picturesque -- there are lots of New Hampshire scenery shots. One quotes my National Journal colleague Charlie Cook, so I'll probably vote for it.
So far, Romney has spent almost $10M on television and radio ads.
September 21, 2007
Also Read These Articles
Is John Edwards admitting he's losing ground in Iowa? Or is he trying to lower expectations? The truth is that the race in Iowa _has_ tightened, owing largely to Hillary Clinton's uptick there -- a result of, perhaps, her television advertising and some of the national bandwagon effect.
Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) wins a major South Carolina straw poll.
Tomorrow, the Hotline sponsors a straw poll on Mackinac Island, MI, where all the Republican candidates will gather .
Jon Stewart flummoxes Alan Greenspan by asking why, in a free country, do we need a central bank that sets monetary policy?
Willard Mitt Obama
Is the real Mitt Romney finally standing up? Here's a statement he'll publish in key early state newspapers. He'll also send the letter to members of the Republican National Committee.
To my friends and fellow Republicans,
Throughout our country’s long and remarkable journey, there have been “inflection points,” critical moments when political, economic, military and other forces converged to alter the course of our history.
We are at one of those inflection points today.
Forces of globalization, the rise of major new economic powerhouses such as China and India, and the emergence of radical Jihad have created a “perfect storm” that will change the course of our nation. We face unprecedented challenges in securing our borders, protecting the American family, and ending America’s dependence of foreign oil.
Our actions today will determine which course America will take. Will America remain the world’s economic and military superpower, able to preserve peace, progress, and prosperity? Will our children and grandchildren grow up with the same opportunities that have been our birthright for over two centuries? Will our uniquely America culture – a culture of family, patriotism, faith, and freedom – remain our foundation and lead a stronger America into the future?
I believe the American people can rise to these and every other challenge ahead of us. Yet, at this extraordinary moment in our nation’s history, our government is failing us. Washington is busy pointing fingers, assigning blame, and spending too much money. There is too much talk and too little action.
The blame, we must admit, does not belong to just one party. If we’re going to change Washington, Republicans have to put our own house in order.
We can’t be like Democrats – a party of big spending. We can’t pretend our borders are secure from illegal immigration. We can’t have ethical standards that are a punch-line for Jay Leno.
When Republicans act like Democrats, America loses.
It’s time for Republicans to start acting like Republicans. We have to remember who we are: We are not Big Government Republicans. We are not Washington Republicans. We are Change Washington Republicans. Democrats are not the change Washington needs. We are the change Washington needs and it’s time for Republicans like us to stand for that change again.
There is not a single challenge America faces that we can’t overcome with the innovation and passion that has always been at the heart of the American people. If we change Washington, I believe America can achieve anything.
It’s time for change in Washington and that change must begin with us.
Sincerely,
Mitt Romney
The Massive Scope Of The AFL-CIO's Political Program
Remember: all of this -- almost all of this -- goes to help Democrats.
Later today, the AFL-CIO will announce that its executive board approved a $53 million budget for its 2008 political program, the largest ever sum for a political cycle.
AFL-CIO political director Karen Ackerman will oversee the deployment of more than 200,000 volunteers to 23 priority states, including Ohio, pennsylvania, Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin. Five house seats in "union-dense" districts and six Senate seats will be targeted.
In Ohio, where union households comprised 28% of the vote in 2006, the AFl-CIO plans to reach out to more than 1.4 million voters.
The labor federation will partner with other groups and use reams of consumer data to market precise political messages neighborhood-by-neighborhood.
"Our members are building an army to make more calls, knock on more doors and turn out more voters than ever,” said AFSCME President and AFL-CIO Political Committee Chair Gerald McEntee. “We're going for the Trifecta: the House, the Senate, and the White House.”
In total, the AFL-CIO unions will spend about $200 million on Election 08 efforts, according to AFl-CIO estimates.
Virtually all of that money will be used to help Democrats.
Republicans have nothing like the AFL-CIO. And for the first presidential cycle in recent memory, the Democratic Party institutions will have a financial edge.
And there's more: next week, the Change To Win labor federation will meet to sketch out its political program. One CTW union -- the SEIU -- plans to spend in excess of $30M by itself.
Judith Interruptus
Turns out that Judith Giuliani has called her husband during a speech before.
Here's what happened today:
And here's video from June 21, when Giuliani was campaigning in Florida.
Inquiring minds want to know: does she not get her husband's schedule on a daily basis? And does any Giuliani advance person have the gumption to tell the boss to turn off his darn cell phone before he speaks?
Glossing over the less appealing line items on his gun control resume, ex-NYC mayor Rudy Giuliani presented himself as sympathetic to the aims of the National Rifle Association and pledged, as president, to protect gun rights.
"Your right to bear arms is based on a reasonable degree of safety," he said.
He indicated that he would oppose new efforts to tighten national gun laws.
"I believe that law endforcement should focus on enforcing the laws that exist on the books as opposed to passing new extensions of laws," he said. "A person's home is their castle. They have the right to protect themselves in their own home."
Giulaini explained the lawsuit he initiated in 2000 against gun manufacturers by saying that he was "excessive in everyway that I could think of in order to reduce crime" but said that "intervening events" like September 11th had caused his views to evolve. "I think that lawsuit has gone in the direction that I don't agree with."
He cited a DC court ruling overturning the city's gun ban as instrumental to changing and "strengthening" his views on gun control. That ruling, Parker vs. the Distict of Columbia, was handed down just as Giuliani was beginning his presidential bid.
Giuliani said that MoveOn.org's ad criticizing Gen. Petreaus was out of bounds and hinted that the group should face some sort of sanction.
"They passed a line that we should not allow an American political organization to pass," he said. "We are at war right now, whether some people want to recognize it or not."
A humanizing moment: Giuliani's wife, Judith, called his cell phone, and the two proceeded to have a lovey-dovey chat. "Good bye, sweetheart, I love you," he said.
McCain's NRA Moment
John McCain and Rudy Giuliani are close friends, but their bond may have to be reevaluated after the Arizona senator's repeated digs at the former New York City mayor at the National Rifle Association convention this morning.
This is a sophisticated crowd. You know politics, and you know politicians. You are pretty used to hearing aspirants for public office come before you and pledge fealty to the cause of the Second Amendment. You know you need to dig into a politician's record to find out where they really stand. You know some will change their position or have little record for you to judge. That is not the case with me.
When I first ran for Congress in 1982, I was proud to have the support of gun owners and the National Rifle Association. For more than two decades, I've opposed the efforts of the anti-gun crowd to ban guns, ban ammunition, ban magazines, and paint gun owners as some kind of fringe group, dangerous in "modern" America. Some even call you "extremists."
I also opposed efforts to cripple our firearms manufacturers by making them liable for the acts of violent criminals. This was a particularly devious effort to use lawsuits to bankrupt our great gun manufacturers. A number of big-city mayors decided it was more important to blame the manufacturers of a legal product than it was to control crime in their own cities. Fortunately, we are able to protect manufacturers from these frivolous lawsuits.
Actually, those don't seem all that inflammatory.
Incidentally, McCain's best moment this morning had nothing to do with guns, per the Chicago Tribune.
As the protesters left the room, McCain leaned into the microphone for the most emphatic thing he said all morning.
"Well, my friends, we beat you yesterday," he said. "We'll beat you today . . . And we'll beat you tomorrow!"
The crowd rose in an enthusiastic standing ovation, setting aside for the moment any past differences they may be holding against McCain. Some of them dislike his support for campaign finance reform and to standardize the sale of weapons at gun shows, but they largely agree with him on Iraq.
GOP Fundraising Outlook Part II: Romney's Final Fundraising Push
Donations usually slow in the third quarter, but former MA Gov. Mitt Romney is ready to write a check to keep his campaign's $80M budget on track. Still, the campaign will make one last public push.
Called the "Rally for Romney," this two-day event features dozens of local fundraisers across the country and culminates in a major Salt Lake City gala on Sept. 28.
In a video posted on the campaign's website, Romney says that "literally thousands" of Romney supporters have agreed to attend more than 40 different events so far.
The campaign has lowered the entry barrier to just $1,000 per person -- previous events had requested that each person committ to raising $5,000.
"Bring your own lists and your own associate fundraisers to reach that goal," a Romney fundraiser says.
Romney's family is pitching in: just this week, Tagg Romney appeared at a $200-per-head fundraiser on Wednesday; son Craig Romney attended a Young Professionals for Mitt event in Georgetown that same night.
Romney's fundraising organization is high-tech, and like every other candidate, he keeps track of donation bundlers by providing them with private codes. When they solicit donations, the new donors provide the campaign with the bundler's codes, and the bundlers are thusly rewarded.
GOP Fundraising Outlook Part I: Romney Backers Worry About Spending
The biggest question that pros will be asking when they assess Republican presidential campaign finances in October: how much of a cash-on-hand advantage does ex-NYC Mayor Rudy Giulani have? The corollary question: how much has Mitt Romney spent?
Through two quarters, he had spent $15M more than Giuliani , and some Republicans estimate that with his heavy spending on television advertising and the Ames straw poll, he'll exceed Giuliani's aggregate spending by $20M through three quarters.
Giuliani advisers won't provide an estimate of their expected haul -- they are very good at keeping their estimates in house -- but they probably will not raise as much as they did last quarter. Through June 30, Giuliani had raised nearly $35M and had $16M left to spend, a burn rate of about 45%.
Romney has loaned himself nearly $9M, which, when subtracted from his $12M cash-on-hand, would suggest that receipts in have not kept pace with disbursements, generally, which have totaled more than $32M. Romney donors said that they had been told that Romney was prepared to spend another $5M to keep his campaign's budget intact. They give a range of $10M to $12M for individual contributions in the third quarter.
John McCain will raise between $4 and $5M; Fred Thompson will probably raise around $6M.
A back-of-envelope calculation: If Rudy raised $13M and kept his burn rate at 50%, he'll have about $22M in the bank. If Romney raises, at a low end, $15M (including his own contribution) and wound up spending $.75 cents per dollar, he'll have less than $8M in the bank. (His campaign reported cash-on-hand totals of more than $12M last quarter, but, per Political Money Line, it had debts of nearly $10M.)
So -- the answer to the first question we posed: Giuliani may have between $11M and $15M more to spend than Romney as of the end of the third quarter.
His campaign knows, however, that Romney could theoretically write himself another check to keep pace.
September 20, 2007
Obama's Campaign Adds A Consigliere
When I interviewed her in June, Valerie Jarrett, who will join Barack Obama's campaign as an part-time senior adviser, told me that, by the late fall, she would be, more or less, working on her best friend's behalf on a day-to-day basis.
Jarrett, a former deputy chief of staff to Chicago mayor Richard Daley, has known the Obama family for more than a decade. She runs Habitat LLC, a Chicago real estate company, and may one day run for mayor. A lifelong Chicagoan, she will be the campaign's outsider-in-chief, complementing the bevy of seasoned political insiders who now run Obama's campaign.
Obama advisers insisted that Jarrett's expanded role should not be read as a sign that Obama has lost confidence in campaign director David Plouffe.
But it's also true that Obama and his wife Michelle decided to bring Jarrett inside the campaign a little earlier than some in Obama's world had anticipated. The Obamas were responding to suggestions from friends outside the campaign who thought the campaign could use a firmer managerial hand.
One Democrat close to Obama said that the candidate agreed that the "nuts and bolts" of the campaign needed to be "tightened." But the Democrat said that Obama had "complete confidence" in Plouffe as a planner and a strategist and was worried that press accounts of any change would falsely incorporate the assumption that Plouffe was somehow being demoted.
The demands on Plouffe's time are extensive; donors and major political figures line up to meet with him, and the addition of high-level talent -- staffers and friends who have stature and the ear of Obama -- will allow Plouffe more time to run the campaign.
Plouffe is among the newer members of Obama's inner circle. He has hiring and firing authority and oversees the campaign's budget along with Marty Nesbitt, a Chicago entrepeneur who is also Obama's best friend. Nesbitt serves as campaign treasurer.
Jarrett will serve as a consigliere of sorts who can mediate disputes between senior staff members and make sure that major projects are completed to Obama’s standards. She will be, for a campaign dealing with challenging questions about race, its most influential African American.
Another change: strategist Steve Hildebrand will take a more aggressive role in running the campaign's political and field departments. Hildebrand put together those departments, wrote most of the campaign's field plan, and divides his time between the campaign's Chicago headquarters and its field offices in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina.
For a major presidential campaign, Obama's inner circle has been relatively free of the acrimony that generally results from the combination of healthy egos and high-pressure decisions. David Axelrod has been the chief strategist, responsible for crafting Obama's campaign argument. Robert Gibbs is the guardian of Obama's image. Pete Rouse, Obama's Senate chief of staff, is a veteran of Capitol Hill politics.
Obama Revives Donor Matching Program
Consider: Barack Obama has 250,000 donors, a small minority of whom have contributed the maximum $2300 for the primaries. A comparatively higher percentage of Hillary Clinton's donors have maxed out. Obama has many more potential wells to tap. So sheer interia is one reason he may outraise Clinton again.
As the end of the quarter approaches, the campaign is pairing up small donors and asking each of them to match the other's contribution.
Campaign manager David Plouffe sent an e-mail yesterday to the campaign's 250,000 donors. One of those donors forwarded the e-mail along.
"I know this is not a novel approach, but I love this idea," the donor writes. "I originally gave $50 back in [redacted] and have been trying to figure out a way to get the most ‘bang for my buck’ on another $50 contribution. This works perfectly."
In the e-mail, Plouffe describes the process:
You choose the amount you're willing to match.
If you want, you can write a message to a potential donor about why they should own a piece of this campaign.
Then you wait. Soon you'll be matched with a fellow Obama supporter who's making their first donation because of your promise to match their gift.
Some Clark Supporters Are Annoyed At His Clinton Endorsement
Ret. Gen. Wes Clark writes to his WesPac flock about his decision to endorse Sen. Hillary Clinton:
As should have been expected, the range of reactions to his announcement has been as wide as the range in types of supporters he has pulled together over the years. Because, this has turned into a major issue for so many within the Clark Community Network, I want to take this time to remind everyone of WesPAC's Mission Statement. It's a lot more comprehensive than simply taking back the White House.
A few days later, he wrote this:
I know many of you aren't willing to throw your full support behind Hillary yet – and I understand that too. I know that each of you have to make your own decisions about who to support in the primary, though I hope many of you will join me in supporting Hillary by the time all is said and done.
The Clarkers seem pretty mad at the boss.
Nocore writes: I've spent over 4 years advocating for Wes with great passion. I've spent longer than that advocating against Hillary with great passion.
I adore General Clark even though I do not post on the blog. While at work, I looked at MSNBC and read that our hero is endorsing Hillary. General, I support you 150%. That being said, I as a Dem cannot stomach Hillary.
Rudy In London
I haven't written much about Rudy Giuliani's amazing trip to London, but it must really jazz up his campaign that he is exfiltrating so much adoring American press coverage for what is, basically, a stunt. And a fundraising opportunity.
One Rudy supporter gloats: Which sends a stronger message? Romney protesting Ahmadinejad's UN visit? Or Giuliani promising to "set them back" five years if they make a nuclear weapon?
McCain Considers First Television Ad
Sen. John McCain, struggling to raise money near the end of the fundraising quarter, may double down. His campaign is thinking about spending between $350K and $500K on its first television ad buy next week, although a final decision has not been made.
The ad would air in New Hampshire and would focus on McCain’s life story.
The hope is that McCain's presence on the tube will energize a grassroots fundraising push. McCain will spend the next ten days raising money in six states and has a major event in New York City next week. McCain has attended more than two dozen fundraisers in September alone.
Campaign aides dispute a report in today's Washington Times that McCain could finish the quarter having raised less than $4M. Aides insist that the campaign has enough money to fund its state campaigns in New Hampshire, Iowa and South Carolina, and point to national polls showing an uptick in McCain's standing.
McCain’s spokesperson, Jill Hazelbaker, would not release the campaign’s fundraising estimates.
In August, after surviving a brutal staff shake-up and horrendous press, McCain emerged from hibernation to promote his new book, and in September, he garnered positive press and a bounce in the polls off of his No Surrender tour, which piggybacked on the Petreaus report to Congress.
Campaign aides would not discuss strategy, but the campaign would surely be tempted, after a $4M quarter, to accept federal matching funds. The problem: McCain may have spent more than state spending limits would permit if he opted into the federal financing system.
This Hobson's choice puts pressure on McCain to demonstrate real progress in state or national polls in October.
I don't think the Clinton team is too mad about this, btw.
Bush Blasts MoveOn
I'm not going to spend time writing about this because I find the whole thing silly and absurd, but it _is_ the political news of the day, and linking to the Washington Post does help my Google traffic referrals, so: here goes. Better yet: the New York Times.
By the way: I wonder whether the U.S. government considers Ahmadinejad a "head of state" or a "head of government." If it's the latter, the fine folks at the Diplomatic Security Service (DS) will be charged with putting together a protective detail. If he's a head-of-state, then the U.S. Secret Service will, by statute, protect him.
Even when the CIA was figuring out ways to, uh, destabilize the Nicaraguan dictator Tachito Somoza in the 1970s, the Secret Service had the unenviable job of protecting the leader whenever he visited New York.
An an Ahmadinejad protection detail would be larger than your average detail because the potential for threats and dispruptions would be significant.
If precedent holds, the Service or the DS would assign at least several dozen agents, armored cars, counter-sniper details (although the NYPD would help with this), probably a counter-assault team, and probably even an SUV equipped with IED-jamming technology.
Here's a weird scenario: presumably, the American security agents have to liaise with their Iranian counterparts, most of whom are probably connected in some way or another with the Iranian central intelligence and security agency.
So how does the Service protect the Iranians from gaining detailed knowledge of protective methods and coded radio frequencies?
(Whoops! SAVAK no longer exists.)
Is Obama Dissing Seniors?
Talented Fixer Chris Cillizza asks whether Barack Obama's new Iowa ad will be "literally and figuratively" the candidate's most important of the cycle.
Every time I speak about my hope for America, the cynics in Washington roll their eyes. You see, they don't believe we can actually change politics and bring an end to decades of division and deadlock. They don't believe we can limit the power of lobbyists who block our progress, or that we can trust the American people with the truth. And that’s why we face the same problems and hear the same promises every four years. My experience tells me something very different. In twenty years of public service, I've brought Democrats and Republicans together to solve problems that touch the lives of everyday people. I've taken on the drug and insurance companies and won. I defied the politics of the moment, and opposed the war in Iraq before it began. This is Barack Obama. I approve this message to ask you to believe -- not just in my ability to bring about real change in Washington.
Iowa is a weird place to run this ad, which is why it's so audacious in the first place. A partisan primary is a very weird time to run this ad, which is why it stands out so much. Independents don't vote in the Iowa caucus; Democrats do.
And oh, by the way: older Democrats disproportionately do. 64$ of caucus goers in 2004 were older than 50; in 2000, 63% percent were older than 50. Attempts to recruit college students to lower the average age of caucus goers have generally failed in the past, although Obama is making every effort.
His ran began to air the day before he skips an important political forum: the Iowa branch of the AARP is hosting presidential candidates in Davenport. Weeks ago, Obama decided to skip the forum.
His campaign strongly disputes the notion that Obama intends not to appeal to seniors; they are, after all, helped materially by his new middle class tax relief plan. But Obama's rivals are certain to try and exploit and heighten the generational tension embedded in Obama's argument. Turning the page implies a break with the old ways of doing things; the baby boomers are no longer the relevant generation; the younger age cohorts are fed up with partisanship, etc.
Dobson's Choice Isn't Fred Thompson. So It's Probably Mike Huckabee.
The AP obtained a private e-mail from el Doctore, James Dobson, within which the good family psychologist makes it crystal clear that he won't be supporting Fred Thompson's presidential bid.
''Isn't Thompson the candidate who is opposed to a Constitutional amendment to protect marriage, believes there should be 50 different definitions of marriage in the U.S., favors McCain-Feingold, won't talk at all about what he believes, and can't speak his way out of a paper bag on the campaign trail?'' Dobson wrote.
''He has no passion, no zeal, and no apparent 'want to.' And yet he is apparently the Great Hope that burns in the breasts of many conservative Christians? Well, not for me, my brothers. Not for me!''
Consider Dobson's dilemma. He's not going to support who he can't sell as a Christian crusader. But he wants -- he needs a seat at the table of power. (Can you imagine Giuliani campaign manager / future White House senior strategist Michael "Power Play" DuHaime giving Dobson a heads-up call about a Guiliani supreme court nominee?)
So Dobson would be wise to find the best pick of the potential vice presidential lot. There's a lot of evidence right now that those "values voters" inclined to choose a candidate based on moral and cultural issues are leaning towards Mike Huckabee.
There's a danger with Huckabee: he's very independent, and while he would certainly consult Dobson and would acknowledge Dobson's role in the evangelical firmament, Huckabee does not help defining what it means to be an evangelical. Remember, the media erroniously calls Dobson a "Rev."; Huckabee's the real thing.
September 19, 2007
Third Quarter Fundraising Prediction Time: The Democrats
Many of you have asked for it and now, after a round of phone calls, here it is. I reserve the right to change my reporting as further information warrants.
Sen. Hillary Clinton: between $20M and $25M. Donors are coming home, and many who were on the fence seem to believe her nomination is inevitable. They're coming aboard too late to get anything substantive from the Clinton trough, although this week's homeland security lobbyist/access fundraiser shows that the Clinton team is capable of being creative in that respect. By this point, one fundraiser told me, these donors don't want to not be on board if and when Clinton wins.
Sen. Barack Obama: a ceiling of $20M. It's not clear whether this ceiling is artificial or real, whether it's an attempt by campaign insiders to manipulate expectations or to tamp then down. Obama will still wind up accumulating more donors than Clinton this quarter; he might not raise as much.
Ex-Sen. John Edwards: around $5M. It's been a tough quarter, money-wise. Edwards's natural fundraising reseviors are dry, his anti-lobbying/donor shtick probably shooed others away, and some internal staff turnover issues have reduced the efficiency of his fundraising operation.
Gov. Bill Richardson: between $4M and $6M. He could beat John Edwards this quarter.
Sen. Chris Dodd and Sen. Joe Biden: each will probably raise less than $2M.
Tomorrow: the Republicans.
If you're a Democratic donor or a Republican donor, e-mail me. I will go to jail to protect your identity. mambinder@theatlantic.com
Bill's Role In A Hillary Clinton Administration
Gallup's question: "Would you like to see Bill Clinton play an active role in policy-making in Hillary Clinton's administration, or not?"
Yes: 53
No: 44
No opinion: 3
(518 adults sampled, so the margin of error is +/- 5 points).
This is a weird question, but the answer gets at a point the Clinton campaign likes to make: Democrats would be just fine if Bill Clinton played a larger-than-usual role in a Hillary Clinton administration. I'm discounting the 53% figure here because of the MOE, although my sense is that some of the 44% are HRC supporters who don't want a co-presidency. The rest are probably Republicans and those independents who don't like the Clintons.
SEIU Members Prefer Edwards, Obama
The Service Employees won't endorse anyone today, but judging from a straw poll of their members, John Edwards and Barack Obama would have the inside track.
That's not a surprise -- Edwards has been working the SEIU for years, and Obama's biography is tailor-made for SEIU members.
Sources close to the SEIU executive board would not tell me whether Edwards or Obama scored higher in the poll but did acknowledge that both had polled the highest. An SEIU spokesperson said the union would not reveal the results.
When Trying To Interpret Polls Now, Beware The Bandwagon Effect
A frustrated Obama supporter e-mails:
Obama is going backwards in polls which makes claims that people don't know him ring hollow. He shouldn't be going backward, especially in the early states. But it is pretty obvious why he's going backwards in NH and SC and nationally, it isn't because people don't know him, it is because they think HRC is gonna win so they join the bandwagon. The problem is that unless Obama actually starts caring about polls this will continue."
I think there's something to be said for this interpretation. There is no real way to separate the aggregate influence of what people perceive to be common knowledge from the snapshots of public opinion that polls provide.
Pollsters and psychologists know that, when then it's too early to pay close attention, many voters assimilate and then give voice to the opinions they know that others hold. We don't like to feel as if they are outliers, so we jump on the bandwagon and temper down our cognitive dissonance.
So part of Clinton's rise can be attributed to a cognitive bias. And the Clinton campaign is smart to exploit its self-perpetuating cycle.
The good news for everyone is that there has to be some reason for Clinton to rise in the first place. The Bandwagon Effect is, at most, a multiplier of a real phenomenon.
It is also not determinative. It can be reversed. And the more voters take time to pay attention, the more confident they'll feel in their own judgments. The more confident they feel, and the more information they have, and the more politics saturates their lives, thay may well feel less pressure to identify with the frontrunner for the solidary benefits.
Iowa and New Hampshire voters have been conditioned to reject the bandwagon effect; voters in states after Iowa and New Hampshire... not so much.
Thank you for reading, and to those of you who took time to write 8400 comments, I am especially grateful.
Are Presidential Candidates Asking The Right Questions About Intelligence Reform?
In Washington last night, across the street from a Barack Obama campaign rally, the nation's intelligence and national security establishment celebrated the 60th anniversary of the National Security Act of 1947, one of the most far-reaching, consequential and controversial folios ever passed by Congress. The event was hosted by INSA, the community’s public/private think tank and featured CIA Director General Michael Hayden as the keynote speaker. Dozens of intelligence and national security veterans past and present were there.
The Act codified the National Security Council, set up the Department of Defense, merged disparate operations into the Central Intelligence Agency and provided legal recognition, for the first time, of the White House's ability to conduct covert operations (and gave the State Department a big say in their sanctioning, which would lead to much tension over the years.)
Apart from the creation of the National Security Agency in 1952, it would not be until 2004 before Congress significantly rewrote parts of the law, creating the Director of National Intelligence position and rearranging parts of the intelligence community to better reflect the challenges of a post September 11 security environment.
Barack Obama Is Not Jesse Jackson. But He's Not Not-Jesse Jackson Either.
And that's why this quote from the Rev. Jackson, spoken in South Carolina yesterday, is so interesting:
“If I were a candidate, I’d be all over Jena,” Jackson said after an hour-long speech at Columbia’s historically black Benedict College.
He's referring to the Jena Six -- black teenagers who feel victim to what appears to be the racial prejudice of authorities in a small Louisiana town.
But Jackson doesn't seem to understand Barack Obama or his candidacy, which is surprising, because Jackson is a supporter, albeit one who Obama has not seen fit to draw into his inner circle. (The reporter David Mendell, in his new book about Obama, has a great anecdote about how Jackson, spying Obama's daughter Sasha at an inaguration event, lifted her up and put her on a small pedestal to pose for pictures. When the cameras stop flashing, Jackson stepped away, leaving his three-year-old girl teetering on a tall block of concrete.)
Barack Obama, while acknowledging that he owes a significant debt to Jesse Jackson, is not running as the candidate of the Democratic urban machine, or as the candidate of African Americans, or as the candidate of the African American political establishment. His run , its assumptions and the way Obama interacts with the establishment is predicated on difference.
It's equally inaccurate to call Obama a deliberate foil for Jackson, who is associated in the minds of many white Democrats and non-Democrats with a type of politics that makes them nervous or uncomfortable. He certainly isn't trying to convince whites that he is less "scary" than Jackson. Now, he maybe he is less "scary," but that's an effect of Obama's personality and biography, and not anything related to choices he made during his campaign.
One Obama adviser chalks the tension up to age and experience: Obama is literally a generation away from Jesse Jackson and would therefore not be expected to share his outlook, worldview, predispositions or habits.
Best Site For Data On Religion And Politics
One of my favorite data repositories, the Association of Religion Data Archives, has an excellent new data site that is requisite book-marking for political junkies. They've purchased access to the 2006 General Social Survey, a massive sociological and demographic poll of the entire country.
Is Romney Enough Of A Change Agent?
Mitt Romney's presidential campaign set sail in January with the goal of navigating around three distinct boueys. Clustering around each were Republican voters with ever-more-difficult questions.
The first were definitional: who is this guy? Is he conservative, enough?
The second was related to policy: what would he do?
The third is functional: why would Romney be better than the others?
Romney couldn't pass to the second and third boueys without covering the first.
The first cluster of questions involved buzzwords: abortion, Mormonism, Massachusetts, flip-flopping, family, marriage. Romney seems to have answered some, though certainly not all, of these. The entrance of Rudy Giuliani into the race helped Romney jump immediately to the policy vetting stage; Giuliani's attributes are so unusual that Romney's look tame and ordinary by comparison.
Romney released a 70-page book of his policy proposals yestersday, suggesting that the campaign now believes that he has successfully established himself as a font of innovate new policies.
Romney's bridging to stage three: the argument. In a phrase: "Change Begins With Us."
Here's the ad:
So Romney will try to close the deal as the facilitator of change within the Republican Party. But he is not running Barack Obama's campaign or even John Edwards's campaign. Unlike the Edwards/Obama hard charge against the System, Romney focuses (not in these ads but elsewhere) on earmarks and spending, he is looking at the symptoms, rather than causes, of the conservative disaffection with its party. He seems to have no problem with the architecture of the modern Republican Party; the pay-to-play nexus of corporate lobbyists and tax policy; the overstimulation of certain interest groups; the reliance on white males for votes; the disjuncture between elites and the base on immigration; the patronage mill culture of Washington; the lack of a Republican foreign policy consensus or even the party's major brand crisis.
Romney talks in generalities of approaching problems differently; of listening to many voices; of bringing efficient business practices to bear in Washington. This is fairly standard gruel. It reflects the reality that President Bush remains sufficiently popular so as to limit the potency and reach of change arguments within the party.
Romney has a much more aggressive change argument to make, one that, should he survive the primary calendar, and become the nominee, some of his longer-serving advisers will push him to make: Romney is nothing like the caricature of Republicans in Washington. As governor of Massachusetts, he was many things, but he was ethically uncorruptable. As a corporate manager, he was ruthless, generous, innovative. The substance of his health care plan has been criticized, but no one who is familiar with its origin and development can consign Romney to a secondary role. He deserves credit as a national leader here, but he seems too afraid that Republicans will punish him if he accepts that mantle.
Late last year, I asked one of Romney's close aides, Cindy Gillespie, how Romney would be different than others who promised change and could not deliver. "I don't know," she told me, "but I know he wants to do it, and he has to do it." The context for my question was Gillespie's observation that Romney was deeply affected by the disasterous response to Katrina and believed that a president with real management experience could have kept more people alive and prevented some of the horrible aftermath.
In Massachusetts, Romney had gall. He dared to challenge the status quo within his state Republican Party. He was so unpopular among Republican elites at the end that one can't help but admire him for sticking to his guns. The playbook he followed was his own.
So where is Romney's gall? I ask because his opponents, in some form or another, have natural and well-defined, easily distinguishable arguments. Just tick them off in your heads, gentle readers. Rudy. McCain. Even Fred Thompson, by dint of his personal attributes alone. Romney has had to work his way to the top tier, and he has succeeded. Without a clear and distinct change message, Republican voters may well begin to ask: "Why is he running?"
Obama Campaign Defends Its Tax Cut Plan
Yesterday, I published a critical view of Sen. Barack Obama's middle class tax relief plan, and after some good-natured ribbing by Obama aide Robert Gibbs, I've agreed to print their response in full.
McArdle: "This will be very expensive."
Obama Campaign: "The plan will cost $80m-$85m and we have a plan to pay for it."
McArdle: "Some of it is a blatant giveaway to those who don't need it; seniors already do *very* well out of the US government."
Obama Campaign: "Seniors making under $50,000 / year are struggling with higher health care as well as energy and heating costs and it is because of these trends that Barack Obama is providing them relief."
McArdle: "The tax simplification thing will not work. Most people itemize because they have to. It directly wars with his plan for a refundable mortgage credit."
Obama Campaign: "First, this simplification plan is not designed for everyone – it’s designed for 40 million low and middle income Americans with the simplest tax situations. The IRS already receives their bank account information, wage information and their mortgage interest information from financial institutions. So creating the tax credit does not make tax filing more complicated for these 40 million non-itemizers because the government gets their mortgage interest information anyways. Many other countries, such as Sweden and Denmark, already do this type of filing."
McArdle: "The refundable tax credit for working families to "rebate" their tax credits is silly; they're already rebated to the poor via the EITC. Expanding the EITC would make sense, but not this silly giveaway to the middle class."
Obama Campaign: "We simply disagree; low AND middle income folks have had stagnant wages and rising costs of living, regardless of whether they receive the EITC or not. The government should do whatever it takes to fight against the economic insecurity of the low and middle classes which is why we provide tax relief to both. Obama believes the middle class deserves a tax break."
McArdle: "The AARP may go nuts over the payroll tax refund; they hate any implication that it's a tax, not a contribution. Presumably the lowered taxes on seniors are supposed to buy their support."
Obama Campaign: "We aren’t saying anything about the payroll tax, rather that the tax code should respect and honor work. The best way to give working people a tax relief is to do it based on the payroll tax (or contribution) because every working person in American pays it. We are not changing the payroll tax – Social Security will continue to raise the same revenue every year."
McArdle: "Overall, not a good plan. There are better, more economically efficient ways to achieve what he is proposing, and there's not all that much money to be clawed back by repealing tax cuts on the over $250K set."
Obama Campaign: "First, the goal of the plan is to provide direct tax relief to workers, seniors and homeowners in a fair way that helps with economic insecurity. This plan represents direct methods of reaching each [payroll offset, seniors, mortgage credit] One of the principle components of paying for this plan and making the tax code more fair is closing tax shelters, corporate loopholes and corporate tax avoidance activities."
September 18, 2007
Rudy Ran As A Liberal Once...
In his broadside against MoveOn.org, Rudy Giuliani calls himself the "worst nightmare" of MoveOn liberals. But he wasn't always as aggressive with progressives. In fact, he ran, thrice, as a Liberal. A Republican-Liberal. Two parties, two ballot lines. Picture it, New York 1, 1993...
"They can send me a signal and vote for me on the liberal line."
That line, from Giuliani in 1993, can easily be twisted into a negative ad today.
Critics have made the point before, and it's true that the Liberal Party in New York City was not a "liberal" party per se. It was born out of frustration with corrupt and fallow Republican and Democratic parties in the 1940s, back when "liberal" meant what "classical liberal" means today. Fiorello H. La Guardia and FDR are among its more famous endorsees.
But until it nearly died in 2002, the party platform was fairly indistinguishable from the Democratic Party's platform: pro-choice; anti-death penalty; pro-universal health care; anti-school vouchers. In its later years, the party was accused of becoming a patronage mill. To some, its endorsement of Republicans like Giuliani and Al D'Amato reflected the personal prerogatives of chairman Ray Harding more than it did any particular political sentiment. Conservatives found that the name of the party confused voters, especially since, as Harding himself would say, it was not a party of liberals. (As a counterweight, actual liberals started their own third party, the "Working Families Party.")
One long-time Rudy watcher told me: "Rudy ran as a Lib-Rep because "Republican" is a bad word in New York, and it gave Democrats a chance to vote for him." The New York Times characterized Giuliani's 1993 appeal as a "non-ideological fusion" candidate. By choosing Giuliani, Harding and his Liberal Party were rewarded.
For the last eight years, the influence of the New York Liberal Party and its leader, Raymond B. Harding -- which is considerable -- has been almost entirely a function of its friend in City Hall, Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani. Mr. Harding helped the Republican mayor win election in a Democratic city by awarding him the Liberal Party line in 1993 and 1997. And Mr. Harding has reaped his reward in access, influence and patronage jobs for family (both sons work for City Hall) and friends alike.
Giuliani advisers are quick to point out that Giuliani, in fact, was so conservative that New York's capital-C Conservative Party did not challenge his re-election in 1997.
But try explaining all of the above in 30 seconds.
The Rest Of The Stories, 9/18
Mitt Romney launched a 60-second radio ad in Iowa touting his committment to the federal marriage amendment. Two weeks ago, a judge overturned the state's gay marriage ban.
Rudy Giuliani's skipping a Palmetto State straw poll of minor import. MoveOn upped its anti-Rudy ad buy to "national cable."
Would Fred Thompson drill for oil in the Florida Everglades? Maybe, er, no, no, NO! Speaking of Thompson: his campaign website now includes an issues page.
In a fundraising e-mail, Edwards campaign strategist Joe Trippi zings Hillary Clinton for attending a fundraiser with homeland security lobbyists. "Today's Clinton fundraising event is a "poster child" for what is wrong with Washington and what should never happen again with a candidate running for the highest office in the land." Meanwhile, John Edwards raised money from trial lawyers in Texas.
Commanding leads for Hillary Clinton and Romney in the latest poll out of New Hampshire. Bill Richardson is inching up among Democrats.
On the National Journal Political Stock Exchange, Fred Thompson is trading particularly, if not artificially high today on the general election board. John McCain saw his nomination standing jump by 7 tenths of a point; frontrunners Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani both saw percentage point increases in heavy trading. What does this all mean? I have no idea.
Obama's Tax Plan: The Politics And Policy
Barack Obama chose a summer, 2005 commencement address at Knox College in Galesburg, Illinois, to voice what his advisers and friends say was his most ambitious attempt to sketch out the Obama political brand. At the time, Obama had no intention of running for president. But echoes of that speech can be found in just about every public policy address Obama delivers, including today's speech on middle class tax relief.
In 2005, Obama put “Social Darwinism -- every man and woman for him or herself” in tension with “our sense of mutual self-regard for each other, the idea that everybody has a stake in the country, that we're all in it together and everybody's got a shot at opportunity - that has produced our unrivaled political stability.”
He will sell his tax cut -- and the taxes that he raises to fund it -- by appealing to the same "mutual self-regard" that animates the American political religion.
Obama has been deeply influenced by academic and popular economic literature on the great shift of material risk to the lower middle class at the same time as the gap between the wealthy and the working class expands. The culprits, in terms of the federal tax code, are the large number of itemized deductions, the mortgage deduction, and the entrenched system of corporate welfare that both political parties sustain. The complexity of the tax code also burdens the poor; the rich can hire good accountants to find them loopholes, while poorer folks.. well, this isn't an economic blog, so I'll stop.
Obama does not eliminate the home mortgage deduction, nor does he do away with all itemized deductions. He did, however, take a step in that direction. Folks who don't itemize their deductions would get a home-owner's tax credit. And he would refund a portion of the payroll tax, amounting to a tax cut of between $500 and $1000 for almost everyone.
A substantive analysis eludes my mind, so I asked my colleague Megan McArdle for her thoughts. She'll post on this later, but for now:
1) This will be very expensive
2) Some of it is a blatant giveaway to those who don't need it; seniors already do *very* well out of the US government.
3) The tax simplification thing will not work. Most people itemize because they have to. It directly wars with his plan for a refundable mortgage credit.
4) The refundable tax credit for working families to "rebate" their tax credits is silly; they're already rebated to the poor via the EITC. Expanding the EITC would make sense, but not this silly giveaway to the middle class.
5) The AARP may go nuts over the payroll tax refund; they hate any implication that it's a tax, not a contribution. Presumably the lowered taxes on seniors are supposed to buy their support.
6) Overall, not a good plan. There are better, more economically efficient ways to achieve what he is proposing, and there's not all that much money to be clawed back by repealing tax cuts on the over $250K set.
So that's one verdict. There will be many others. By way of clarification, here is how Obama's campaign describes the mechanism of payment: "Obama would pay for his tax reform plan by closing corporate loopholes, cracking down on international tax havens, closing the carried interest loophole, and increasing the dividends and capital gains rate for the top bracket."
Details are not yet available.
Why Thompson Said "Yes" To A Cancelled Debate
Yesterday, I wrote about the debates ex-Sen. Fred Thompson has decided to attended. One of them, per the campaign, was scheduled for October 14 and sponsored by ABC News and WMUR.
Turns out that ABC News cancelled that debate a while ago, preferring to focus on others -- possibly because the GOP candidates were slow in accepting invitations.
"ABC News hosted the August debates moderated by George Stephanopoulos and will host January debates moderated by Charles Gibson," ABC's Andrea Jones e-mails. "At this point, the Thompson campaign has not called to officially accept any of the debates we are hosting this cycle."
Thompson's spokesman, Todd Harris, said today that ABC News never announced that the debate had been cancelled. He said that if ABC reinstated the October 14 debate, Thompson would be happy to participate.
A Gimpy Microphone Doesn't Faze Obama
Cranky cameramen and a tetchy in-house audio system delayed the start of Sen. Barack Obama's tax cut speech.
10 different networks, including Japan's NHK, sent photographers and audio assistants to the event. To allow the cameras to record high-quality audio, The Brookings Institute borrowed what's known as a "mult box" from the Hilton hotel on Embassy Row. The mult box connects to the podium microphone and has two dozen inputs; it's easy to plug in and record.
For a few minutes, the podium mic was hinky. An audio tech from one of the networks unsnapped it and replaced it with one of her own. A CNN producer scurried up to test the new mic. It worked. All was well.
And then, inexplicably, an employee for Brookings unhooked the operational mic and replaced it with the broken mic.
"Don't do that," one photographer screamed. It took a few more minutes for the right mic to find its way to the right mic stand.
Fifteen minutes late, the program began. But the microphone was still gimpy. The TV guys had good audio, but those of us sitting in the Ambassador ballroom here were treated to a high-gain, reverb version of the speech. It's a little hard on the ears.
But begin we did.
Taxing Obama
Headed out to listen to Barack Obama unveil his middle class tax cut/simplifcation proposals.
In brief, Obama would offer a homeowner's tax credit for non-itemizers, eliminate the federal income tax for seniors making less than $50K per year, simplify tax filings, and cut taxes by providing $500-to-$1000 payroll tax offsets. He'd pay for the plan by using money recovered from a repeal of the fabled Bush tax cuts for those making $250K. (He has also said he'd pay for his health care plan by repealing the tax cuts).
Obama's speech is embargoed until he utters it, so I can't say much more.
Obama's aides have said that his tax cut proposal will be a centerpiece of his fall campaign, much in the way that Bill Clinton, in late 1991 and early 1992, campaigned on a middle class tax cut. (See a vintage Clinton advertisement here.)
Clinton dropped the tax cut proposal when he became president, but he later retroactively realized that his expansion of the earned income tax credit amounted to a significant tax cut for working class families.
How will Obama frame his tax cut? Clinton, in 1992, always twinned his proposal with a vow that the rich ought to pay their fare share.
Rudy Admits: He Is "Worst Nightmare" Of Some Americans
Usually, this column ignores outbreaks of Outrage Excema -- that is, when politicians and interest groups artifically puff up their collars and pretend to be horrifed at some piddling action or statement by another politician or interest group. So we thankfully missed the absurd back-and-forth over MoveOn's inflammatory but politically unremarkable New York Times ad about David Petreaus.
Still, it's rare when the frontrunner engages, and Rudy Giuliani, by in a radio ad released in Iowa today, does just that. Responding to MoveOn's ad on the same subject, a disembodied voice says:
Voiceover: MoveOn.org is the most powerful left wing group in the country. They spent millions electing anti-war liberals. And publicly brag how the Democratic Party is theirs - bought and paid for. Why is MoveOn attacking Rudy Giuliani? Because he’s their worst nightmare. They know Rudy is a Republican who can beat the Democrats. And they know, no matter what they say- Rudy will never, ever back down. Rudy Giuliani: I’m Rudy Giuliani, and I approve this message.
This is smart, albeit tin-can, politics. The more successfully Giuliani defines himself as the anti-liberal, the less Republicans will want to question his... liberal qualities. The more Republicans identify Giuliani as the only Republican who can beat Hillary Clinton and the Democrats, the less they'll ask about gun control in New York.
Clinton's Health Care Plan Has Novel "Choice" Frame
From a political vantage point, one novel feature of Sen. Hillary Clinton's health care plan is that it's the first Democratic proposal framed by the language of choice -- a significant departure from the framing that accompanied her 1993 plan, which touted "health security" for Americans. A lesson learned: the political elites focused on insuring the uninsured; voters worried that a new bureaucracy would constrain choices. Clinton's plan is titled "American Health Choices."
Speaking to reporters this morning, Clinton predicted that her critics would have a much more difficult time demagoguing her proposals. She was blunt:
"It's not a government run health care system. It creates no new bureaucracy. People are going to have the same health care choices as members of Congress, and so it's going to take quite a bit of contortion to come up with that sort of misrepresentation."
"Americans from all walks of life," Clinton told us, "aren't going to be fooled again."
In 2000, Democratic intellectual Andrei Cherny wrote "The Next Deal," which described what he called "the Choice Revolution." Cherny challenged Democrats to envision government not as a guarantor of rights and security but also as a guarantor of, a provider of, a facilitator of, choices.
Clinton and other Democratic presidential candidates have read the book; at one of those fancy Washington book parties the bloggers love to hate, I once saw Clinton and Cherny chatting about it.
The Clinton plan incorporates universal coverage but does not define itself by that goal. It incorporates cost-cutting but does not define itself by that goal, either. Instead, the freshest fruit of Clinton's plan is that it secures universal choices.
By the way: the plan wins important and substantive plaudits from three of the most influential voices in center-left cognoscenti.
The New Republic's Jonathan Cohn wondered: "Would she be vague, figuring she had the least to prove on the matter and that details could only come back to haunt her? Would she settle on something less than universal coverage, figuring the political support for it was too weak? Would she kowtow to the insurance and pharmaceutical lobbies, which had started donating to her campaigns? The answer seems to be no, no, and no."
Ezra Klein, who is even harder to please, calls the policy proposals "very, very, sound."
The only question is how serious of a proposal it is, i.e, whether it's what she plans to fight for from her first day in office, or whether it's to keep Edwards and Obama from opening up an advantage on her left flank. For now, there's no way to know. But given how smart she's been about neutralizing the other candidates' potential advantages -- including, with this plan, cutting their legs out on health care -- we're likely to find out.
And my colleague Matthew Yglesias writes that Clinton is "is drawing close to checkmating her opponents."
Flight Deck Of The Day: The Space Shuttle
A new feature, based on the assumption that many readers are as fascinated by flight decks and cockpits and control rooms and avionics as I am.
(Courtesy: HowStuffWorks)
The National Journal Political Stock Exchange
Our cousin company, National Journal, has partnered with Intrade to launch the first branded political stock exchange this cycle.
I'll be writing a weekly handicapping column that will be tasked with explaining why youse all decided to buy who you bought and sell who you sold.
In one sense, the exchange represents the apocalypse for good-government types who bemoan the application of horse race and football metaphors to politics. Sorry about that.
But from our vantage point, it's a novel way to get a sense for the aggregate daily swings of opinion among the political elites. If you believe -- as I believe -- that the political elites can influence the worldviews of the non-elites, then there is some merit to this venture.
Regardless, it's fun. And it's free -- we'll give you free (fake) NJ Dollars to play with.
Please check it out. Fairly soon, when the gods of IT are smiling, I'll add a ticker of NJPSE data points to this page.
Major GOP Candidates Skip Values Voter Debate
Last night, instead of Monday Night Football, I watched streaming video of the Family Research Council's Values Voter debate in Ft. Lauderdale, and was most impressed by who was not there: the candidates who have a real shot to win the Republican nomination. No Mitt Romney. No John McCain. No Rudy Giuliani. No Fred Thompson.
(Wouldn't you have loved to see Rudy Giuliani questioned by Phyllis Schlafly’s)?
It's a safe bet that Romney and Thompson will indeed show up at the FRC's Values Voter briefing, scheduled for October 19 through October 21 in Washington. This gathering of religious conservatives will either be an important milestone in the presidential race or a peg for the media to write stories about how an unorthodox Republican is likely to get the nomination and how angry James Dobson will be at this point in 2008.
Last year, George Allen used the event to restart his campaign after the Macaca incident; Mitt Romney delivered a widely praised-and-criticized speech about marriage; Rudy Giuliani was treated like a rock star but spoke for 40 minutes without pandering to the audience.
BTW: Straw poll alert: Members of FRC Action, its PAC, are voting online in a straw poll.
September 17, 2007
Ron Brownstein Joins The Atlantic
Ronald Brownstein, who joins the Atlantic Media Company as political director next week, is the type of reporter who reads the 1994 CBO score of the Clinton health care plan. For fun.
He is the political reporter who takes policy seriously, honing his craft at National Journal, after all, before becoming the chief political correspondent at the Los Angeles Times and then its national affairs columnist after the paper objected to the woman he fell in love with.
He is the political reporter who other political reporters secretly envy because he is so damn smart and so damn perceptive. (He was a Pulitzer finalist, twice.)
He's going to write a weekly column for National Journal and contribute to all of our company's publications, and I'm quietly hoping to convince him to blog in this space occasionally... just occasionally, Ron, no worries ... if only to give this column's readers a real treat.
At SEIU, Obama "Rocked The House"
WASHINGTON, D.C -- A charged-up Sen. Barack Obama begged politically active members of the Service Employees union to join his “movement” to reform the Democratic Party.
“The question I ask SEIU members is, not "Who is talking about your agenda?" but "Who can change politics in Washington to make that a reality,” Obama said. “Change starts by making sure a Democrat is in the White House. Change doesn’t end just because a Democrat is in the White House. It’s time to turn the page on the old way of doing business.”
In many ways, it was the longest sustained encapsulation of Obama’s complex, primary argument that a Washington, D.C. audience has heard. It was heavy on passion and sloganeering and comparatively free of the nuance that marks that Obama’s regular stump speech.
SEIU's members are temperamentally suited to Obama; he is a longtime friend of Chicago's SEIU Local 880 and worked closely with the union as an organizer and later as a state legislator.
Obama entered the ballroom to cheers, but he left to a sustained chorus of chants: “Obama!, Obama!” The SEIU president, Andy Stern, had to calm his members: ““Everybody take your seats, please. We have other candidates.”
One of them, Sen. John Edwards, is lobbying hard for the SEIU's endorsement. The SEIU members gave Edwards, who spoke several hours after Obama, an equally rapturous reception. "I intend to be the best union president in the history of the United States," he said.
Hillary Clinton was greeted politely, and applause came from the red meat lines she threw at the crowd. Significantly, there were no catcalls when Clinton talked about Iraq. Equally as significantly, the audience did not scream her name in unison when she left.
Obama has generally shrugged off the interest-group glad-handling that is generally required of Democratic presidential candidates, but the energy with which he spoke today made clear that he is eager to associate himself with the SEIU. But not solely for its political clout: he wants SEIU members to ratify his biography – they are an organizing union and he began his career as an organizer – and to ratify his argument that Hillary Clinton is too polarizing, too calculating and too change-averse to pursue transformative policies. If any union – actually, if any coherent part of the Democratic Party – is capable of being drafted into Obama’s movement, it’s the Service Employees. In this vein, the Service Employees executive committee would not dare lend its endorsement to John Edwards if the membership seemed to be supporting Obama.
Obama seems more popular with SEIU members than he does with SEIU executives, many of whom are said to favor Edwards. A senior SEIU official acknowledged that Obama "rocked the house" but noted that a larger-than-usual contingent of Illinois members attended the event, giving Obama somewhat of a home-state advantage here.
Obama’s swipes at Clinton were oblique, and it took his audience a few tries for them to understand what he was getting at. The audience didn’t quite get this: “It’s time we had a Democratic nominee who, after the primary, doesn’t choke saying the word union.”
But they got this:
“The problem is that too many people in this town see politics as a game and so if you think politics is a game then you start evaluating your candidates to see who can play the game best,” Obama said. “The question is: who can actually bring an end to the game plan. It has to be, who can put an end to the division… who can stand up to the lobbyists and the corporate interests … and [say that] American’s interests come first. “
Noting that Clinton had dropped her health care reform policy a few hours before, Obama allowed that it had some “good ideas,” but suggested the messenger – Sen. Clinton – could not be trusted to lead on the issue as president and evoked the secrecy that surrounded her failed 1994 reform attempt. “But the real key in passing universal health care is the ability to bring people together in a process that is open and transparent and builds real consensus, and I’ve got a track record of doing that.”
Obama implied that Edwards was a Johnny-come-lately.
“I’ve spent my entire adult life working with SEIU. I’m not a newcomer to this,” Obama said. “I didn’t suddenly discover SEIU on the campaign trail. Oh, y’all organize. You wear purple, do you?” he said, referring to the spirit color the SEIU has chosen.
But Edwards has spent the past four years courting the SEIU, local-by-local. SEIU officials estimated that a majority of the crowd had previously met him in person. They swarmed him as he entered and exited.
Lucky NBC News Gets First Fred Thompson Debate
The first time you'll get to see Ex-Sen. Fred Thompson challenge his fellow Republicans in a debate will be October 9 in Dearborn, Michigan.
It's sponsored by CNBC, MSNBC and the Wall Street Journal and will focus, generally, on the economy.
Per Thompson's campaign, he'll participate in an October 14 ABC News/WMUR/New Hampshire Union Leader debate and a Fox News debate in Florida on October 21.
Hillary Clinton's Health Care Plan
Honestly, I haven't had time to read it or to think about, and so I will refrain from writing about it until tomorrow, when the Ron Brownsteins of the world have weighed in.
I gather that Barack Obama's campaign believes it has found a vulnerability in the plan's cost-cutting measures, and the campaign is eager to point out how close Clinton's plan is to Mitt Romney's 2004 health care measure in Massachusetts.
Richardson's SEIU Gaffe
"Thank you AFSCME!"
That was how New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson closed his speech to the SEIU membership in Washington today.
SEIU is many things, but it is not AFSCME -- the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.
AFSCME is, in many states, an SEIU rival.
Oops.
Why Edwards Is Confident About Health Care Politics
According to his advisers:
(1) He was first out of the gate with a plan to insure everyone; Clinton's plan borrows heavily from Edwards's.
(2) Edwards has credibility with Iowa voters on domestic policy issues, like health care.
(3) Elizabeth Edwards's health worries provide a subtext and prevent Edwards's opponents from criticizing him too much.
(4) This mantra: "
Edwards said on the first day of his administration he would submit legislation that ends health care coverage for the president, all members of Congress, and all senior political appointees in both branches of government on July 20th, 2009 - unless universal health care legislation that meets four specific, non-negotiable principles has been passed by that date.
" -- In other words, Edwards is bolder than Obama.
Romney Holds Hillary Bashing Event In Front of Rudy's Hospital
Ex-MA Gov. Mitt Romney, in deciding to jump all over Sen. Hillary Clinton's health care plan this morning, picked an auspicious location: he stood in front of the emergency pavillion at St. Vincent's hospital in New York.
Said Romney: "Hillary Care continues to be bad medicine. Hillary Clinton fundamentally believes in Washington. She doesn't believe in the American people." He continued in this same vein, using a series of "in her plan" versus "in our plan" riffs.
The subtext: Hillary Care is not Romney Care.
Speaking of Clinton's plan, Giuliani's communications director wrote this statement and e-mailed it to the press:
“If you liked Michael Moore’s ‘Sicko,’ you’re going to love HillaryCare 2.0. Senator Clinton’s latest health scheme includes more government mandates, expensive federal subsidies and more big bureaucracy – in short, a prescription for an increase in wait times, a decrease in patient care and tax hikes to pay for it all.”
Note the "government mandates" part. Giuliani advisers want to compare Romney's Massachusetts health reform bill -- which Giuliani has faulted for its expansion of bureaucracy and its mandates -- to Clinton's.
Whether Romney's Massachusetts bill -- which is not to be confused with the more free-market oriented approach he has taken in the presidential campaign -- is like Clinton's bill... well, that's a debate for health care policy wonks to have.
Romney aides don't buy the comparison, and in any event, seem very willing to debate health care with Giuliani. After all, Romney actually tried to solve the problem.
BTW: What's Fred Thompson's approach?
Giuliani Speaks To The NRA Cattle Call This Friday
An NRA spokesman tells me that ex-NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani, a prominent advocate for gun control when he was mayor of New York City, will be among those presidential candidates who speak to before the NRA's Celebration of American Values convention in Washington Friday.
The NRA members know Giuliani's record well, and many Republicans believe that Giuliani's past support for tough gun laws will prove deadly.
But Giuliani is signing a different tune these days.
Also attending:
Sen. Fred Thompson, Sen. John McCain and Gov. Mike Huckabee.
Democrat Bill Richardson will speak to the NRA via videotape, along with Rep. Duncan Hunter and Gov. Mitt Romney.
Obama's Team Is Confident About Health Care Politics, Too
Obama:
"I comment Senator Clinton for her health care proposal. It's similar to the one I put forth last spring, though my universal health care plan would go further in reducing the punishing cost of health care than any other proposal."
Here's why, from the perspective of Obama's campaign, the politics of health care cuts in their favor:
(1) Her plan isn't terribly bold, reinforcing the idea that she cannot see more than a few inches in front of her face, whilst Obama can see around the corner.
(2) By refering, repeatedly, to the "secrecy" and intruige surrounding the botched 1994 effort, Obama's team extends their argument that Democrats really can't trust Clinton at the end of the day.
(3) They disagree with the Clintons about whether Democrats laud Clinton for having tried health care first; in the view of Obama's advisers, Democrats blame Clinton for giving Republicans the power to halt any momentum towards universal health care.
(4) Clinton chose to unveil her proposal late in the game, suggesting that she's a follower, rather than a leader; Democrats know she waited and wondered why; key health care interests in the party are frustrated.
The White House Does Not Care About Pissing Off Conservatives
Pardon the language, but it just seems way too facile to write that the reason President Bush nominated Michael Mukasey to be the next attorney general is that he somehow wants to avoid a fight with Democrats.
Probably not.
Instead, consider Mukasey the most confirmable nominee among those potential nominees who support the president's most important domestic policy priority: changing the national security system to reflect the realities of modern terrorism.
Make no mistake: this is about policy. The president cares more about his "terrorist surveillance program," national security letters, and aggressive anti-terrorism prosecutions that he does about where a nominee goes to church or how many abortion-related cases he has argued.
President Bush's political team is reconciled to the fact -- the fact -- that he will be unpopular. They're noticed, however, that President Bush can still win major political and policy debates despite being so unpopular.
Mukasey doesn't seem to care about the intersection of law and culture. He does care about the administration's policy priorities on terrorism and national security.
Mukasey is fairly unique among federal judges for having anticipated and sanctioned many of the arguments the Bush Justice Department and David Addington employed to justify detaining enemy combatants; he has presided as a judge over terrorism cases; he has lobbied for changes to federal law to make it easier for the government to surveil persons of interests more covertly; he has criticized the very concept of the FISA court.
In short, he is, in the eyes of President Bush and Vice President Cheney, the perfect advocate for the President's national security policies. He is the perfect foil for Democrats -- the administration, anticipating the fight about the renewal of the covert surveillance statute, wants the best team possible.
Mukasey is also extremely smart and very well regarded by fellow judges. He may well find a friendly reception from Democrats; Sen. Harry Reid seems to find him a credible nominee.
Clinton's Team Confident About Health Care Politics
Like a debt collection service, the Democratic world will today finally recieve the long-awaited health care reform plan from Sen. Hillary Clinton, first in Iowa, and later in Washington, before an audience of the Service Employees International Union.
Sen. Clinton and her advisers are confident that the politics of the issue will cut in their direction. No need to hedge by writing they "seem confident" or "appear confident" -- they really are confident, which is not to say that they would ever betray any worry.
Here, according to Clinton advisers, are the reasons behind their thinking:
(1) -- Clinton knows these issues cold, and Democrats know that she knows them cold.
(2) -- If the argument is that Clinton limits herself to what's politically feasible, her early efforts at health care reform -- politically tone deaf, uncompromising, unyielding -- are a nice counter.
(3) -- Clinton's plan is fairly similar to Obama's plan.
(4) -- Ex-Sen. John Edwards will attack Clinton from the left, portraying her plan as too accomodationist and timid; Obama will attack Clinton from the center, calling her too polarizing to lead on such a vital issue; Republicans will attack Clinton from the right as "socialized medicine" or some other gimmick phrase. The attack message will therefore be muddled.
(5) -- Democratic voters give Clinton credit for having tried; they don't so much blame her for having failed.
September 10, 2007
Off The Grid
This column will spend a few days off the grid. In the meantime, readers can debate this question:
If Rudy Giuliani wins the Republican nomination, he'll put Connecticut and New Jersey in play for the GOP and force the Dems to spend money in the expensive NYC market.
Which Democrat(s) could similarly expand the map, in which states, and why?
September 8, 2007
McCain's "Road To Victory:" An Actual Internal Memo
In an internal memo sent to political advisers this week, John McCain's campaign manager Rick Davis writes of "four phases" the campaign plans to "roll out" in September.
This isn't one of those internal memos meant for public consumption. It contains unusually specific information about campaign strategy and tactics.
The first phase of our September strategy is to take ownership of the surge and demonstrate again that John McCain is the only candidate running for President who is prepared to be Commander-in-Chief from day one
After laying down the marker as the only candidate in the race prepared to be Commander-in-Chief from day one, we will highlight John McCain’s record of reform and his often lonely fight in Congress against wasteful spending and earmarks, against corruption and for stronger ethics accountability, and for real institutional reform to decrease the size of government and make it work effectively.
Then comes policy roll-outs, which the campaign calls "Bold Solutions for the Future."
McCain will also speak of his religious faith:
John McCain has faced unique personal challenges in his life; he has overcome them all through his faith in God, faith in country, and faith in his fellow man. Spanning issues as diverse as religious freedom, internet pornography and support for the war against Islamic extremists, faith will play an important role in discussing these issues
Davis sees the key events of the "Fall Launch" as taking place in three stages. The first -- happening right now -- is the reintroduction of McCain, capped by his appearance tomorrow on This Week with George Stephanopoulos.
On 9/11, the campaign begins its "No Surrender Tour" in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina to "build support for the fight against Islamic extremists." After the last event on the tour, McCain will return to Washington and "lead the debate in the Senate against Democrat efforts to force surrender in Iraq."
After the Senate debate, McCain will "finish out the month of September with some high profile speeches, appearances, and an increased focus on the media." That includes a stop on the Late Show with David Letterman on 9/26.
Davis recognizes the need for McCain to have a strong fundraising quarter.
September is not only an important month politically; it is the final month of the third financial reporting quarter. It is essential that the campaign have a good month fundraising and finish the quarter strong.
An attachment lists information about 15 separate fundraising events.
Clinton Campaign Insists: Payroll Tax Off The Table, Too
When HIllary Clinton told an audience of AARP members in Iowa yesterday that cutting Social Security benefits or raising the eligibility age to boost Social Security's long-term sustainability was "off the table," it was meant to be a direct shot at Sen. Barack Obama, whose table contains those sour-tasting options.
So how would Clinton reduce pressure on the Social Security trust fund? The print edition of today's Wall Street Journal suggests that Clinton hasn't ruled out raising the payroll tax.
"When it comes to Social Security," she will stand her ground, Mr. Singer said. "People rely on Social Security." Asked if that would mean an increase in the current payroll tax, he said, "Among other things, yes."
Just as Mr. Bush's insistence on private accounts caused Democrats to refuse to bargain with him over Social Security in 2005, Mrs. Clinton's stance against benefit cuts would likely cause anti-tax Republicans to refuse to come to the table. Mrs. Clinton, in the new campaign speech she unveiled this week, boasted that she has a record of working well with Republicans, and would do so as president.
"You can't always demand everything your own way, or you'll never get anything done in America," she said in Iowa.
Spokesman Phil Singer, asked to square that with her line on Social Security, noted that Mrs. Clinton also said a president has to know "when to stand your ground and when to find common ground."
"When it comes to Social Security," she will stand her ground, Mr. Singer said. "People rely on Social Security." He said Mrs. Clinton's goal was to avoid a payroll-tax increase and to fix the system by working toward a surplus in the overall federal budget.
September 7, 2007
The One Campaign Has Bono; Ed In 08 Has Kanye
The rap superstar cuts a PSA for the Ed In '08 campaign. It shipped yesterday to Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada.
The Atlantic's Boldest: The Weekly Corrections Column
One major correction this week:
1. Actor John Mahoney is alive and well.
Instead of reading more corrections, why not take a look at two new features by two reporter friends at the Washington Post. The Post's internet politics writer, Jose Antonio Vargas, has his own YouTube channel. And Chris Cillizza has yet another another weekly task.
Also: The fascinating and mysterious Jennifer Rubin interviews Louis Freeh about Rudy Giuliani.
Former U.S. Amb. Alan Keyes is sending signals to allies that he is weighing a late bid for the Republican presidential nomination, two sources close to the two-time presidential candidate say.
This week, Keyes's name was registered to participate in the West Virginia Republican convention in 2008 -- that party's delegate selection contests. The entry fee is $5000 and the deadline for payment was last Friday, according to the state party's website.
Sources close to Keyes confirmed that he has begun to talk to some of his longtime advisers about a run. But they said he did not direct RenewAmerica, a grassroots activist group he chairs, to send in the fee.
RenewAmerica has started an active Draft Keyes movement through its political action committee. The PAC paid for a table at the Iowa Republican Party straw poll in Ames last month, and Mary Parker Lewis, Keyes's long-time chief of staff, wrote in an e-mail that she would probably rejoin RenewAmerica soon.
But, she, said, "To date, I would say he has only very provisionally, only in principle, approved their efforts as a moral conservative voter mobilization," Lewis said.
Renew America's website includes this paragraph:
"Alan has also given the movement's leaders his general permission to undertake their effort in the first place — on the condition that they make it clear that, while he is aware of what they are doing and generally approves of it, they are acting independently of him and assume full responsibility for the effort.
For the record, this enterprise is entirely these leaders' idea — not Dr. Keyes' — and Alan has never encouraged them to undertake it."
One source said Keyes wants to speak at the Family Research Council's Values Voter Summit in Washington, scheduled for October 19 through the 21st.
Keyes calls himself a "declarationist" and has said that judges should interpret the constitution as it was written and in light of the "self-evident" truths contained within the Declaration of Independence. His earlier presidential bids have earned him the reputation as being a great debater and a great foil for "mainstream" conservatives but little else. He's also a three time former U.S. Senate nominee, having most recently tried to beat a guy named Barack Obama in Illinois.
Paul Tewes, Obama's Iowa coordinator, marveled, "It is something I've never seen before in politics. After people hear him speak, they say that they feel at peace." That phrase -- "feel at peace" -- has also never been used before by a veteran campaign staffer since I covered my first Iowa caucus in 1980.
Fred Thompson’s announcement speech Thursday in Des Moines was underwhelming.
The former U.S. Senator and movie actor formally announced his long-awaited candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination at the Des Moines Convention Complex. It wasn’t very impressive.
The crowd of a few hundred didn’t seem enthused. Thompson’s oratory didn’t soar but was somewhat rambling.
Thompson Opens Smoothly, Soberly
DES MOINES -- Fred Thompson’s official campaign kick-off was high-tech, low-key and well-produced. His speech, a sober disquisition on the country’s perilous times in the context of Thompson’s own record, was certainly not purchased from the deli. He threw out only a few slabs of red meat if only to inoculate himself against complaints that he wasn’t proud to identify himself as a Republican.
Mostly, he inveighed against Washington.
“One of the arguments against term limits … is that is look all the expertise that you’d lose,” he said. “Is it lack of expertise that we’re lacking or is it lack of will to do the right thing? I think it’s the lack of will. And politicians kick the can down the road.”
“My friends, we need to deliver a message to Washington that we’re better than that and we need to start delivering that message by electing a president who will blow the whistle on that lack of accountability, and I’m the guy who will do that.”
Barack Obama couldn’t have written better pox-on-the-Beltway lines, and Thompson, even more than Obama, sounds like an outsider. But Thompson was a Washington lobbyist who lives inside the Beltway. It is not clear, as of yet, how many Republicans know this or whether, when they do, will reject his message as a simulacrum.
It may turn out to be a blessing that Thompson got rid of the Washington consultants who managed (or mismanaged) the first phase of his coming out as a candidate.
Though there is plenty of foment among the professional and elite class of the Democratic Party for a change message, no Republican except for John McCain is running to reform and reverse the moral failings of his party. And in that context, it’s hard to discern a thematic difference between McCain and Thompson. They seem to hold an identical position on the war on terror and Iraq – the campaign believes that national security debates will dominate the rest of the primaries and the general election.
“I am a man who loves his country, who is concerned about our future and knows that in the next years, it’s going to require strong leadership,” Thompson said. “We must show the determination that we are going to be United as the American people and do whatever is necessary to prevail not only in Iraq but in the worldwide conflict that lies beyond Iraq.”
Indeed, it’s not hard to see why Thompson and McCain were (are?) close friends, collaborated together on legislation (campaign finance), and even pat their audience on the back the same way: They share a worldview.
So we go back to first principles: what distinguishes Fred Thompson from John McCain and the other Republicans?
“From what I hear, he stands for the right positions on military and on the moral issues,” said one attendee, Wayne Murrow, a long-time caucus goer from Colfax, Iowa. “ For each of the others, there’s been at least one thing I don’t care for.”
A reporter asked whether Murrow knew about Thompson’s integral role in writing the McCain-Fein gold campaign finance legislation.
Mr. Murrow, who is distantly related to Edward R., didn’t know what McCain-Feingold was, and in any event, did not seem to care.
“He reminds me a lot of Ronald Reagan,” Allie Vicker, a thirty-something, from Des Moines.
Maggie Cradd, who attended the event with her 11-month-old daughter Campbell, did not mind Thompson’s elongated testing-the-waters phase and did not chalk it up to dawdling. “He waited and made a calculated decision to enter the race,” she said. “That’s what a leader does.”
Brian Lokesitch of Des Moines sported a Thompson sticker but said he was uncommitted. “All of the Republicans say the same things,” he said. “For me, it’s about attitude.”
From these conversations and others, two differences emerge. The first is that Thompson has less of a history running against his own party. And second – that old devil again – he just sounds a hell of a lot more presidential. He fits the archetype of a president. Even in his slimmer, Kelsey-Grammerish incarnation, he looks a president. All of this is cliché – so clichéd that you might wonder why it bears repeating. It bears repeating because it’s undeniable asset to Thompson, one that will open so many doors to him, one that will allow him to paper over discrepant parts of his resume.
“We have a candidate who needs a special type of campaign, “ Bill Lacy, Thompson’s campaign manager, told me. “So what we’ve tried to do is structure the campaign so it is built around his unique strengths, and those are that he is a genuine conservative, small town values, and that’s why we wanted to go with the video announcement on the website. And third, we’ve got a lot a lot of grassroots supports that we need to take advantage of.”
With the Iowa caucuses four months away, I wondered whether Thompson had enough time to build a harness for that energy and the general discontent within the Republican electorate.
Absolutely, adviser Rich Galen told me. Mitt Romney, he noted, barely breaks thirty percent in the polls. True – but candidates don’t generally win with majorities, either.
At most, “we’re maybe a couple of months behind,” acknowledges Robert Haus, Thompson’s Iowa state director. Still he was confident that Thompson would recruit plenty of precinct captains available who know the ins and outs of Iowa Republican audiences. The poo-bahs at campaign headquarters, he said, had given him free range to make Thompson’s campaign as “broad and as deep as we can make it.” That means a mix of retail politics events, town hall meetings and traditional stump speeches. Haus later shared a laugh with Dave Kochel, a veteran Iowa Republican strategist who works for Mitt Romney. Kochel was there to check things out, nothing more.
He probably did not come away too alarmed. Thompson’s advance team managed to fill the room, claiming to have signed in 450 supporters. (The consensus among the press corps was that about 200 people showed up – still impressive for the middle of a workday.) Make-work campaign posters dotted the walls. The highlight was the staging. Three mammoth projection screens were set in a vaguely Hellenistic, egg-shell colored-frame. There were no hitches. One woman fainted. The event started on time. Thompson worked the rope-line. The buses loaded up. And off he went.
Club For Growth's Generally Positive Take On Thompson
The Club for Growth's white paper on Ex-Sen. Fred Thompson is mostly positive, but there are some mine fields.
“Fred Thompson’s eight-year record is generally pro-growth with an excellent record on entitlement reform and school choice and a very good record on taxes, regulation, and trade,” said Club for Growth President Pat Toomey. “His belief in a limited federal government is demonstrated by his numerous votes against government intrusion in the private sector and increased federal spending. His fondness for Tennessee pork aside, Thompson consistently voted against increased spending and new government projects, at times, one of only a handful of senators to do so.”
The white paper provides an in-depth look at Thompson’s strengths and weaknesses, giving the Senator credit for supporting the flat tax and for sponsoring legislation for Social Security personal accounts at a time when few would touch the issue. At the same time, the white paper explores Thompson’s enigmatic record on tort reform and takes the southern Senator to task for his instrumental support of McCain-Feingold, questioning why his belief in limited government doesn’t extend to government’s regulation of political speech.
Awaiting the verdicts from Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. This decision may be even more tough than the May 2007 vote on the war supplemental because the tenor of the debate has shifted. It's not a question of whether troops will come home; it's a question of when, how many, and how fast?
Dodd released this statement today:
"Rather than picking up votes, by removing the deadline to get our troops out of Iraq you have lost this Democrat's vote. Despite the fact that this has been the bloodiest summer of the war and report after report says that there has been little to no political progress, the White House continues to argue that their strategy is working. It is clear that half measures are not going to stop this President or end this war. I cannot and will not support any measure that does not have a firm and enforceable deadline to complete the redeployment of combat troops from Iraq. Only then will Congress be able to send a clear message to the President that we are changing course in Iraq, and a message to the Iraqis that they need to get their political house in order. I urge my colleagues to join me and declare their opposition to this measure."
Florida and Michigan May Still Matter
Dare it be said: I think the Des Moines Register's David Yepsen doesn't quite have the right reading of the "Four State Pledge" the leading Democratic presidential candidates, including Hillary Clinton, took last week.
If Clinton loses Iowa, Yepsen writes, "What could she do? She might have tried to use her financial advantage and name recognition in the polls to mount a quick comeback in Michigan and Florida. Now, she's taken that option off the table."
Not completely. It's true: she won't win any delegates. But (a) the media coverage of Florida and Michigan is TBD. And (b), the pledge doesn't prevent the campaign from spending certain amounts of money in Florida, raising money in Florida, or even scheduling $1 a pop major rallies. It doesn't prevent campaigns from giving interviews to local television, from running national cable advertising spots, or even, in some interpretations, from running ads on local television stations. In theory -- and the Clinton campaign certainly endorses this theory -- Michigan and Florida are no longer closed piggy banks. In theory, a Clinton "win" there could help her blunt a defeat in, say, South Carolina.
That said, it's true that, had Michigan and Florida remained in good standing with the DNC, Clinton would have a better strategic vantage point.
The Thompson Campaign: The Cast Of Fraiser?
Trying to find a picture to illustrate this morning's post, I came across a spapshot of the actor John Mahoney, who played Martin Crane on the NBC television show Fraiser.
This is exactly what Bill Lacy looks like.
Intriguing: with Fred Thompson's recent weight loss, the candidate looks like the actor Kelsey Grammer.
Fred Thompson Is No Dummy
For what ails Republicans, we will soon find out whether Fred Thompson is the cure or whether he is a sugar pill.
Even his admirers admit that his popularity so far is just that -- popularity -- like the Rockefeller Center Christmas tree, something to gawk at and admire.
At a certain point in every race, candidates acquire celebrity momentum. Barack Obama had two such points: in December and then in January; Howard Dean had two in 2003; John Kerry had one -- right after Iowa. Fred Thompson has already had one -- months ago, when he first started to talk about running. He has another right now, and it will not last.
When candidates wear the lucky celebrity coat, every network morning show wants them on RIGHT NOW. Every magazine writer wants to put him on the cover. This -- meaning -- this week -- is Thompson's second moment. He probably won't get another moment. He can make the best of it and break free from the stereotypes which have settled on his candidacy, or he can live up to them. Thompson is no dummy, so he should get this.
Thompson benefits from the placebo effect. Apparently, some Republicans -- not enough, but some -- see him, hear him, and conclude that he's a consistent conservative. For the reason, he needs to get some meat on them bones, he'd better clothe the naked emperor, and quickly! Thompson is no dummy; for the sake of his ambition, he'd better get this.
As the press watches Fred Thompson today and over the next few days, we'll look for signs of laziness -- we'll be hyper-alert for signs that Thompson is hesitant, tentative, slow-moving. We'll notice if he doesn't shake all the hands he sees or zips through a stump speech. In one way, Thompson can turn this perception into a boon: the expectations for him to a compelling retail candidate are so low, that even a fairly maudlin performance will shatter them. Thompson is no dummy; he gets this.
Thompson's campaign manager is Bill Lacy, Jr., formerly of the Robert Dole Institute of Politics at the University of Kansas. He was a deputy political director in the Reagan White House, was the RNC political director after that, and managed Thompson's come-from-behind victory in 1994. In 1999, he helped Thompson explore the possibility of running for president that year. Over the past few weeks, Thompson's hand-picked campaign manager, Bill Lacy, stepped in to save the floundering testing-the-waters effort, reorganizing every department and recruiting an entirely new roster of staff. In the process he stepped on many toes, firing Linda Rozett because she was too inexperienced and kicking out Jim Mills, the former Fox News producer, ostensibly because he was not enough of a team player. According to Fox News's Carl Cameron, Lacy nixed a planned announcement speech in favor of a Leno/Internet kick-off, reasoning that the latter would be bigger, even as the former would be more proper, more traditional, more intellectually correct somehow. Thompson deserves a campaign manager who knows him and fits his personality. He also deserves staffers who are loyal to him and to the vision he entrusts to his campaign manager. Say what you will about the turnover of the turnover: there were lots of leaks. That was good for us journalists and bad for Thompson. Now, Thompson is surrounded by guys he trusts. One of them refused my offer of a lift from the airport in Des Moines last night; he had too many confidential telephone calls to make. Discretion counts; Thompson, finally, gets this.
September 5, 2007
Thompson Arrives In Des Moines @ 12:15 ET And Announces
Aboard a BAE 125-800A. He departed Burbank at 6:17 pm local time.
"I was a teen aged husband"
"I had dinner on the factory floor..."
.....bobble head...
"Part time film career."
"Won two elections by a 20 point margin in a state President Clinton won twice."
.....bobble head....
"Common sense conservative principles."
[To Republicans]: "You don't want to have to come back from another Clinton victory."
"Success will depend upon the determination of the American people. That's why we'll win."
"Schools continue to fail our children and endanger our future competitiveness."
"Someone has to decided what costs are worth the money. It can be the government, the insurance company, or you. I think it's best for you to decide what's best for you and your family."
"Market-driven" [health care]
School choice
"when our leaders come together as adults"
Other Thoughts..
** Frank Luntz's focus group loved McCain and thought Rudy Giuliani talked about New York too much.
** Fred Thompson's communications director, Todd Harris, e-mailed a response to the debate: "Greetings from the 14th floor of the lovely Des Moines Marriott. I am of course watching tonight's Fox News debate and it is clear to me already that though Fred Thompson is not on stage, our opponents are already letting us dominate the narrative of this campaign."
** Sean Hannity seemed to be angry at Carl Cameron for letting someone ask a tough question of Mitt Romney.
** Rudy Giuliani squeezed off a subtle jab at Mitt Romney's perfect family.
And The Winners Are....
My head tells me not to anoint winners, because, really, I'm not a New Hampshire voter and what the heck do I know about how they watched the debate?
My gut instinct: Mike Huckabee and Rudy Giuliani won. John McCain did very well, too.
Debates are about moments, and this debate belonged to an impassioned exchange between Ron Paul and Huckabee about the Iraq War. Fox News smartly let the two men have their say. Refreshing: an actual substantive debate about core principles. What do we owe to the Iraqi people? Ron Paul says nothing -- "we" as in Americans didn't make the mistake, the neocon cabal did. Mike Huckabee believes that the war was a mistake. But -- America's honor is at stake. Honor -- a word that Huckabee associated with John McCain. A word that resonates with the Republican electorate. "We have to be one nation. That means, if we make a mistake, we make it as a single country. Even if we lose elections, we should not lose our honor." Huckabee said the country owes to the Iraqi people our best effort to prevent genocide and stabilize the country. "We have to continue the surge. What we did in Iraq is we essentially broke it. It's our responsibility to try and fix it." Huckabee earned the biggest applause of the night. It may have been -- dare we say -- his break-out moment in New Hampshire, where support for the war isn't all that strong. (If this exchange had occurred in South Carolina, it definitely would have been a vote-earning exchange.) Huckabee was also asked tough questions about his immigration stance; he should wear them as a badge of honor. It means that his rise is being taken seriously by the press and by the Republican electorate.
The crowd seemed to like Giuliani's every answer on subjects resting on all three legs of the Republican stool. As he's done in all the other debates, Giuliani sought to contrast his own governing experience with the lack of said experience on the resumes of the Democratic rivals.
Generally, any effort to knock Giuliani's record in New York City fails. Maybe not factually, but Guiliani just sounds like a guy who knows what he's talking about. That aura really helps -- it's also why so many evangelicals hear him and say, "yeah, he's a conservative" even when presented with his moral liberalism. Giuliani's response to the question about his New York City immigration policies was concise and strong. Props to Giuliani's research, team, though, for producing the actual executive order that was the subject of a back-and-forth with Romney.
Another good moment: asked to explain his messy personal life, Giuliani answered with a great sensitivity: "I am not running as the prefect candidate for president as the United States. I am running as a human being..." and "Any issues in my private life do not effect my public performance."
The press will love his answer on the Grover Norquist tax pledge: "As president, I take only one oath," he said.
John McCain mustered strong answers on the economy, his national security experience and even on immigration, and managed to create a conflict between himself and Mitt Romney on whether the surge was working; McCain was 100% sure it was working, and Romney was... pretty darn sure it was working. But -- realistically -- how could Mitt Romney possibly know for sure whether the surge was working? It might be an article of faith with McCain, but Romney was where most Americans seem to be -- cautiously optimistic. Clearly, McCain finds Romney irritating.
When the father of a U.S. soldier chastised Mitt Romney for comparing the Romney boys' political service to the service of soldiers for their country, the dramatic tension would have been resolved by an apology -- even though Romney has already apologized. It was the hardest moment to watch. This is where Romney's crispness cuts too harshly. He seemed not to connect with the father's evident pain and hurt.
Otherwise, Romney, being very familiar with New Hampshire's inner maw, had well-thought out answers for every other question, even as three of the first four turned, in some measure, on whether he flip-flopped. A strong answer on abortion; there "two lives" to consider, he said -- the baby and the woman. Fox's Wendell Goler implied that Romney would withdraw troops quicker than Hillary Clinton, a low blow that might hit Romney later on. Romney seems to want to balance support for the surge with an acknowledgment of the political realities in America. That Romney raised $260M in fees came up for the first time in a debate, but it's a subject many New Hampshire Republicans probably know about and probably is irrelevant when McCain and Giuliani refuse to sign Grover Norquist's tax pledge. TBD: whether Romney's efforts to draw a distinction between himself and Giuliani succeeded or was lost in the rest of the debate.
In case the audience reaction was confusing tonight, this is New Hampshire. Moral libertarianism and social conservatism. It was hard to tell whether gay marriage got more applause than boos. Surprisingly for a debate in New Hampshire, there was little debate about the economy and fiscal policies.
Also present, without much distinction or lack thereof: Duncan Hunter, strong as always but lost among giants, and Sam Brownback, knowledgable and on his game, but, as always, lost among the giants.
Out Of The Gate, Romney Contrasts With Giuliani
Asked to reconcile contradictions about Sanctuary Cities -- Massachusetts had several and Romney didn't do a whit about 'em until late in his term -- Romney turned the tables on Rudy Giuliani, portraying him as pro-sanctuary cities and pro-amnesty.
Giuliani:. "I didn't have the luxury of political rhetoric. I had the safety and security of people of New York City on my shoulder."
Republicans Jab At Thompson's Absence
Whither Fred Thompson?
Says Mike Huckabee:
"Well, I was scheduled ot be on Jay Leno tonight but I gave up my slot to someone else to be in New Hampshire with these fine people. Fred Thompson no show George -- for not showing up
at his contest. Maybe Sen. Thompson will be known as the no-show of the presidential debates."
John McCain jabs at Fred Thompson.
"Maybe we're up past his bedtime."
Mitt Romney allowed that Thompson would bring "entertainment" and "new ideas."
The only reason I have for Sen. Thompson is... why the hurry? Why not take more time off?
Rudy Giuliani:
I think he's done a pretty good job playing my part on law and order. I personally prefer the real thing.
The Debate: Opening Observations
Fox News calls it the "first in the fall debate." Well, they have to hype it somehow.
That Fred Thompson ad ... it aired before the final block of the Bill O'Reilly show, which ran directly into the debate. So if you tuned in at 9:00 pm ET, you'll miss it.
Thompson's Rebuttal On Immigration Overlooks "C" Grade
Ahead of tonight's Republican debate in New Hampshire, Ex-Sen. Fred Thompson is trying to pre-empt attacks on his Senate voting record.
After the Washington Times this a.m. published an article calling Thompson "soft" on immigration, the campaign released a memo calling Thompson "a consistent supporter of conservative immigration proposals." The memo does not mention the Washington Times piece, which called attention to "a series of votes in the 1990s against cracking down on illegal aliens. Those include a 1995 vote against limiting services other than emergency care and public education to illegal aliens — he was one of just six senators to oppose that proposal — and a 1996 vote against creating an employer verification system to help businesses filter out illegal aliens who apply for jobs."
The memo says that Thompson:
OPPOSED the McCain-Kennedy Immigration Reform Bill.
OPPOSES amnesty for illegal immigrants.
SUPPORTS tougher border control along the U.S./Mexican border.
SUPPORTS increased penalties against alien smuggling and document fraud.
The memo brags that Thompson has an "A+" from an advocacy group called "Americans for Better Immigration" on the subject of border security.
That's true.
But there's more to the story.... ABI gave Thompson a "C" for his overall Senate record.
ABI also gives Thompson an "D" on votes to reduce the incentives for illegal immigrants and an "F" on votes to reduce the number of foreign workers coming to the U.S.
ABI is not part of the anti-immigration fringe; its executive director, Roy Beck, is a high-profile advocate for reducing immigration -- overall.
Obama, Clinton Air "Change" Ads
Change is in the air. But what does it mean? Or rather -- what needs to be changed?
Both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton will begin airing television ads today called "Change." The Obama campaign considers the "change" rationale to be their turf, and so they might view Clinton's decision to lean into her own "change" credentials as a sign that the Clinton campaign believes that Democrats are more interested in change then they are in experience.
Clinton's campaign would say this: Clinton scores highly on the change quotient, and if she can convince that her change dividend is enough, then she's neutralized a critical threat from Obama. And Clinton's strategists say that Clinton scores the highest among those working class Democrats who want to change their material conditions.
The two ads show how both candidates define change differently.
Obama's ad, which will air in Iowa, "it wasn't to score points with the powers in Washington. It was because Barack Obama wants government to work for people." At the end of the ad, Obama uses a phrase reminiscent of Howard Dean's thundering campaign stump speech circa 2003: "We're going to take our country back."
"We will change things in this country. Because we want it. Because we have one candidate who spent her life fighting for it. Standing up for our families, our children, our veterans." "We will end this war. We will give health coverage to everyone. We will be energy independent." "If we have the will, she has the strength. If we have the conviction, she has the experience. If we’re ready for change, she’s ready to lead."
Clinton's campaign also sent out a memo supporting their decision to go with "change." It's after the jump.
Fred Thompson's rivals concede that his campaign roll-out is -- so far -- impressive. That said, I haven't detected any real anxiety.
** They did not anticipate that Thompson would run an advertisement during tonight's Republican debate on Fox News; they quietly acknowledge that Thompson will get a lot more benefit from appearing tonight on Jay Leno's show than he would if he subjected himself to a debate. New Hampshire is not, at the present time, one of Thompson's targeted states, so his decision to skip the debate isn't really salient to his overall campaign strategy.
** They did not anticipate the hiring of Todd Harris, a campaign veteran with real presidential experience.
** In the past two days, the campaign has sent reporters six e-mails touting favorable press or poll numbers -- a sign that the mood inside the campaign is improving.
** Thompson still seems to have a Fox News problem, Sean Hannity aside.
** All this fluff will be put to the test tomorrow in Iowa. What are size of the crowds Thompson builds? Are they programmed or enthusiastic? Does Thompson's energy hold up during the day?
Fred Thompson's First Ad Is Here...
A Fox source tells me that it won't play during the debate itself... it's set to run during the final ad block of The O'Reilly Factor.
The 30-second ad was produced by Nelson Warfield; a slightly altered version will run throughout the day on Fox News tomorrow.
Rudy Giuliani/ Haley Barbour In '08?
It's always fun to speculate. Or take it a step further: this ain't out of the realm of possibility.
Check out this made-for-TV introduction the governor of Mississippi had for Giuliani yestrday:
"I think what a lot of people don't realize that as mayor of New York City, Rudy Giuliani did almost everything that a conservative Republican would hope to get done in New York City."
Romney Expands Advertising In South Carolina
Ex-MA gov. Mitt Romney will show his face a lot more on South Carolina TV. His campaign spokesman said today that a new ad, "Energy," would begin to air in rotation with an earlier ad touting Romney's leadership skillz. Energy will first air in Iowa and New Hampshire and will migrate to South Carolina by the end of the week.
Romney's decision to expand his television advertising in South Carolina coincides with Fred Thompson's aggressive campaign kick-off. The expansion, however, would have proceeded without Thompson's entrance.
By the way: "Energy" does not refer to "energy" as in "energy policy." It seems to be a word that has tested well for Romney and so the campaign wants to associate itself with that attribute. Think: Romney is to Energy as Fred Thompson is to ....
September 4, 2007
Oh, Gore
In 02138, Al Gore seems pretty confident that he _will_ endorse a presidential candidate. He won't say who, yet. He does allow that some of the presidential candidates have paid private (prospecting?) visits to his home in Nashville.
Fred Thompson Will Air A Television Ad During The Fox News Debate
From the campaign:
McLEAN, VA - Friends of Fred Thompson Committee today announces that it plans to air a 30-second television commercial entitled "Debate" tomorrow night on the Fox News Channel. Additionally, the committee will be airing a modified version of the ad, entitled "I'm In," on Thursday, September 6th.
"One of this campaign's greatest strengths is Fred's ability to connect on a one on one basis with voters. By driving viewers to our website to hear his webcast announcement and learn more about Fred, these ads play to that strength and help to build our network in advance of his first trips to the early primary states as a candidate," stated campaign manager Bill Lacy
Michigan Democrats Blast DNC; Calls Pledge "Gun To The Head"
Two top Michigan Democrats, anticipating that the Democratic National Committee will strip them of all their convention delegates now that the state has scheduled its primary for Jan. 15, sent a letter to DNC chairman Howard Dean protesting the party's "selective enforcement" of its calendar rules.
Sen. Carl Levin and Debbie Dingell, a member of the Democratic National Committee, write that New Hampshire's ostensible decision to move its primary before Jan. 19 -- the day the DNC currently schedules the primary -- violates the same rules that Michigan has run afoul of.
"Someone has to take on New Hampshire’s transparent effort to violate the DNC rules and to maintain its privileged position. Hopefully the DNC will, and you will, promptly urge our candidates to stop campaigning in New Hampshire because of the New Hampshire’s expressed intent to violate the DNC rules," the two write.
It's widely assumed that New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner will schedule the new Hampshire primary on or about Jan. 19. The DNC has indicated that it will allow New Hampshire to make the change -- and will allow Iowa to move up its primary date as well.
Dingell and Levin, long opponents of Iowa and New Hampshire's privileged spots on the primary calendar, were among the prime movers of the new Michigan state law setting its primary for Jan. 15.
The major Democratic candidates have all signed a "pledge" to abide by DNC rules, which penalizes candidates who campaign overtly in non-compliant states.
Dingell and Levin write:
New Hampshire’s gun remains at our candidates’ heads and they fear the repercussions to their campaigns in New Hampshire if they don’t sign the New Hampshire pledge -- dramatic proof, if any more were needed, of the disproportionate impact of the New Hampshire primary.
The pledge has loopholes; candidates can raise money in non-compliant states and aren't required to abide by the rules. Since the DNC has taken all of Florida's delegates away and will likely penalize Michigan the same way, the candidates are, essentially, off the hook if they do decide to campaign there. But few will.
In spite of Clinton's comfortable lead in nomination preference polls, a recent Gallup Panel survey finds that -- in theory, at least -- Democrats by a large margin attach more importance to a candidate who would bring about change than to one who has experience.
The Aug. 23-26 Gallup Panel survey posed the following questions to Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents:
Which will be more important to you when deciding which candidate to support for president in next year's election -- [ROTATED: that the candidate has experience getting things done in the current system in Washington, (or) that the candidate has a strong desire to change the system for getting things done in Washington]?
The results of this forced-choice question were lopsided in favor of "change" -- 73% of Democrats said changing the system would be more important to their decision about whom to support, while only 26% opted for "experience."
A Non-Endorsement Endorsement?
Montana's Gov. Brian Schweitzer introduces Ex-Sen. John Edwards at a fundraiser.
Dinner's On Obama; Lunch Is On Hillary
Sen. Barack Obama's fundraising team came up with a unique way to incentivize new donors: regular Obama supporters could win -- have won, actually -- dinner with the man himself.
And now, Hillary Clinton wants to take you to lunch.
It's a fairly standard campaign technique -- John Kerry used it before Obama and Clinton did.
September 3, 2007
Romney and Obama Cross Paths
MILFORD -- After a devastating flood last April, Milford needed a boost, and the Labor Day parade here, one of the oldest in the country, did the trick. There was Barack Obama and his moving rope line greeting students. Mitt Romney pausing to shake hands with firefighters. Chris Dodd holding his beautiful young daughter.
This is a Republican town; no other Republican had a presence here, except for a pair of signing-waving Guiliani backers and a truckload of veterans for McCain. This day, it seems as if his GOP rivals were yielding New Hampshire to him.
Romney, cheerful, suntanned, dressed in a polo shirt, came prepared with a few sound bites for the reporters. At a brief press conference,he teased Ex-Sen. Fred Thompson, who has decided to announce his presidential candidacy one day after an important debate here.
"I guess the only comment I'd make to Fred Thompson is, 'Why the Hurry?' Why not take a little longer to think this over? From my standpoint, if he wants to take 'till January and February, that's ideal."
Romney noted that the rest of the Republican field "would have had five debates without him."
Of this Wednesday's debate, which Thompson will skip, Romney said: "I think it will boost the ratings for the Jay Leno show, but I'd rather be doing well in New Hampshire."
He also tweaked Sen. Hillary Clinton, whose speech yesterday made the newspapers here for her assertion that she'd bring change to the country.
"I have no doubt in my mind that she would do her best to change America, but she would not take us in the direction that would lead to a strong America," he said. "Hillary Clinton: she'd bring change, it would be a sharp left turn..."
Done with the press, Romney walked about 20 yards to his east. There, Barack Obama was greeting a small crowd of wellwishers, mostly high school and college kids wearing "Department of Peace" tee-shirts. A Secret Service agent guarding Obama's rear tried to stop the phalanx consisting of Romney, several camera crews and Romney aides from slipping right behind Obama, but it was to no avail. Romney stuck his head in the camera shot and gave Obama a big "Hello, Senator!" Obama seemed mildly amused. "Well, let's wait until we debate," he said.
Romney jaunted off.
CNN's Candy Crowley asked Obama what he thinks he should do differently to jar Hillary Clinton out of her seeming lead in the state and nationally. (Note: Obama's campaign would dispute the premise). "People know me in terms of my name, but you get a sense that I sort of popped on the scene two years ago, instead of knowing my track record, working as a civil rights lawyer, as a community organizer and a state legislator," he said. "What we're doing is describing to the American people my background, why I think I can bring something new to the American political scene, why it's so important for us not to just change parties in the this election but to change politics in Washington."
A Reason To Start Over New. And The Reason Is ...
MILFORD, NH -- Labor Day is, to be sure, an artificial dividing point for American politics. It’s not as if voters who were uninterested Friday suddenly become, on Tuesday, voluminous consumers of information. But somehow it’s become a custom to believe that, before Labor Day, it’s “early.” After Labor Day, it’s – real time. Before Labor Day, campaigns test messages; after Labor Day, they’ve settled on one. A message, basically, is a reason. It’s a reason dressed up in the stale language of politics – “change,” “hope,” “meeting challenges” “stand up” – but somewhere in there, an argument about a reason lurks.
In New Hampshire yesterday, Hillary Clinton’s reason became crystal clear: she said she was candidate of both change and experience – banners helpfully repeated the message in case it was obscure. In one phrase, Clinton performs a bit of jujitsu: it’s true that voters perceive her as a change agent. Now she wants them to believe that she is enough of a change agent. Clinton will repeat the “change and experience” mantra throughout the fall. Voters seem to be giving her the benefit of the doubt right now, so she’ll try to and reinforce these sentiments with what will probably be a set of fairly bold policy proposals. "I know some people think you have to choose between change and experience," she said. "Well with me you don't have to choose. I have spent my who life fighting for change."
Obama, speaking this morning in Manchester, has honed a sharp and distinctive counter-message. In a phrase, it’s “Turn The Page.” It means that real change requires something more than what Hillary Clinton (and even the Democrats) can offer. Obama’s message is a dare to voters: if you want change, choose me. “As bad as George Bush has been,” he said this morning, “it’s going to take more than a change of parties in the White House to truly turn this country around.” Special interest politics “was there before they got to the Washington, and if you I don’t stand up and challenge it, it will be there long after they leave.”
Obama said he’s running for president because “to meet America’s challenges, changing parties isn’t change enough. We need something new. We need to turn the page.”
He takes on his foil: “So let’s be clear – there are a lot of people who have been in Washington longer than me, who have better connections and go to the right dinner parties and know how to talk the Washington talk. Well, I might not have the experience Washington likes, but I believe I have the experience America needs right now. “
At the end of his speech, he returned to his thema primus*: “if you want a country that no longer sees itself as a collection of Blue and Red States; if you want a president who can lead a United States of America; then I ask you to believe in this campaign.”
Clinton assumes that voters will perceive her as enough of change agent; Obama’s is that voters will not. She also assumes that his lack of foreign policy experience will matter to voters; Obama assumes that enough voters will count it as a plus.
Is it too early to predict that, on the eve of the New Hampshire primary, if the political argument is about change, then Obama and John Edwards have an edge. If the argument is more complex; if it’s about experience or something else, then Clinton has an edge?
1. Can Mitt Romney -- or -- any Republican disqualify Rudy Giuliani based on moral/social issues and/or his personal/professional controversies? If so -- how?
2. Fred Thompson: can he debate?
3. What final argument will Barack Obama make against Hillary Clinton?
4. Does John Edwards cling to his lead in Iowa?
5. Do Florida and Michigan matter to Democrats? Does Hillary Clinton need momentum from Florida to vault into Feb. 5?
6. As the Democrats begin to pay more attention to their races, does it benefit Obama? Clinton? Edwards?
7. What's going to be in Hillary Clinton's health care plan? Will it be more comprehensive than Barack Obama's?
8. What unanticipated, outside events -- Black Swans of politics -- will pop and change the dynamics of both primaries in ways one cannot anticipate?
9. Does the press pay more attention to the Democrats? If so, does that change the contours of the Republican race?
10. Mike Huckabee: does the Club for Growth matter? If not, is there anyone else on the Republican vice presidential shortlist?
Edwards Is Endorsed By Steelworkers, Mineworkers
In Pittsburgh this morning, ex-Sen. John Edwards will proudly receive the endorsement of the United Steelworkers and the United Mineworkers of America, giving him the largest bloc of union endorsements so far.
USW claims 1.2M current members and retirees, including nearly 9,000 in Iowa.
September 1, 2007
The Jockeying Behind The Four States Pledge
On Friday, Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina asked all the Democratic presidential candidates to follow the rules set out by the Democratic Naitonal Committee and committ not to campaign in states that violate those rules. By Saturday morning, every candidate but Hillary Clinton had signed.
This afternoon, her manager, Patti Solis Doyle, issued a short statement:
"We believe Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina play a unique and special role in the nominating process. And we believe the DNC’s rules and its calendar provide the necessary structure to respect and honor that role.Thus, we will be signing the pledge to adhere to the DNC approved nominating calendar."
So -- Clinton signs the pledge. That's a surprise. Clinton's advisers yesterday were telegraphing their intention not to sign....
What happened? Here's the Clinton campaign's evolving rationale: Clinton leads in Florida and Michigan right now. All other things being equal, she'll probably lead in those states in January. She can "compete" by not competing. That's an advatange of being the frontrunner. Also, thanks in part to the campaign's mid-May Iowa reset after the Mike Henry Iowa memo, Clinton's strategists believe they can win Iowa and do not want to jeopardize the good will she built up with party leaders there.
Barack Obama's manager, David Plouffe, explains his campaign's decision:
“To become the Democratic nominee for president, a candidate must secure a majority of delegates to the national convention. Because states that violate DNC rules will not be allowed to contribute to the delegate tally, we urge all states to ensure their compliance with DNC rules so they can participate in our Democratic nominating process. Our campaign will work within the rules established by the DNC to earn the support of Democrats across America and run a grassroots campaign to unite Americans around Senator Obama’s commitment to challenging the conventional thinking in Washington.”
Right now, Florida is the only state judged to be in violation of the DNC's laws. The pledge asks candidates not to campaign there but includes an exception for fundraising. Michigan's Democrats decided Friday to resubmit their delegate selection plan to the DNC, changing their approved Feb.9 caucus to a disapproved Jan. 15 primary. The DNC will probably take all of Michigan's delegates away.
Put yourself in David Plouffe's mind. True, Florida and Michigan will have their delegates restored at the convention. But in January, when delegate accumulation matters, they'll have none. Should Obama spend more of his money to compete in two states which won't reward him delegates, or should he spend considerably less money explaining to voters in Florida and Michigan why he's not campaigning there?
What no one really knows is how the press will cover, first, the Michigan primary on the 15th and second, the Florida primary on the 29th. If every candidate pledges not to participate, then a Clinton victory will be expected.
But here's something to consider: the Republican National Committee's rules allow it to take away only half of the delegates. So Florida and Michigan will be covered by the press as real contests for the Republicans. That makes it more likely that Clinton's victory in those states will be known -- and while the press will certainly apply the no-delegate caveat, it's going to be tough for them not to spread the word that the majority of Democratic voters in those populous states chose Hillary Clinton.
That's one reason why Clinton's campaign probably hesitated before signing the pledge.
The other is that Clinton's strategists disagree with the DNC about Florida's viability in the general election. Clinton's team believes she can win there; the DNC is more skeptical that Democrats can recover. Clinton doesn't want to give Republicans a heads-up there.
Here's a question to consider: will Clinton find ways to visit Florida without campaigning? Will her campaign find ways to make sure she stays high in the polls there? Since Barack Obama patented the technique of charging $5 entrance fees for fundraisers; could Clinton hold large fundraisers
BTW: Gov. Jennifer Granholm issued a statement this a.m.:
"We expect that all of the Democratic candidates for President will be on the ballot in Michigan on January 15th. We hope that every candidate will campaign here."
Marc Ambinder, an Atlantic associate editor, blogs about politics and Washington. He might also write the occasional post about aviation, national security, and cognitive neuroscience. Mostly politics, though.
John McCain saw his nomination standing jump by 7 tenths of a point; frontrunners Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani both saw percentage point increases in heavy trading. What does this all mean? I have no idea.
Ahead of tonight's Republican debate in New Hampshire, Ex-Sen. Fred Thompson is trying to pre-empt attacks on his Senate voting record.
Two top Michigan Democrats, anticipating that the Democratic National Committee will strip them of all their convention delegates now that the state has scheduled its primary for Jan. 15, sent a letter to DNC chairman Howard Dean protesting the party's "selective enforcement" of its calendar rules.
| 
