1. To the best I can gather, here is what most likely happened to set off CTV's reporting that the Obama campaign is fudging the truth about its NAFTA intentions. Someone from the Canadian consul general's office in Chicago got to talking with Dr. Austan Goolsbee, he the principle economic adviser to Sen. Obama, and NAFTA came up. Mr. Goolsbee may have warned him that the rhetoric about NAFTA might be amped up and that the policy follow through might not be as drastic as the volume of the rhetoric would indicate. By no means, though, does that mean that Obama isn't serious about renegotiating the labor and environmental provisions of NAFTA -- just that, Goolsbee may well have said, Obama recognizes that the normative case for NAFTA is not as one-sided as general campaign trail bromides make it out to be.
2. Slate's Chris Beam isn't quite sure where Obama election manager David Plouffe gets some of his numbers.
3. The Hotline's Jennifer Skalka on a sublime moment of silence precipitated by this question to assembled Clinton advisers: pray tell -- when, precisely, has Sen. Clinton been tested by a foreign policy crisis?
4. This is why John McCain's campaign may hire senior -- as well as junior -- staff -- and soonish: getting endorsed yesterday by John Hagee earned him lots of tsuris and a wasted news day, and forced this apology:
"Yesterday, Pastor John Hagee endorsed my candidacy for president in San Antonio, Texas. However, in no way did I intend for his endorsement to suggest that I in turn agree with all of Pastor Hagee's views, which I obviously do not.
"I am hopeful that Catholics, Protestants and all people of faith who share my vision for the future of America will respond to our message of defending innocent life, traditional marriage, and compassion for the most vulnerable in our society."
5. Barack Obama's response to "Children" is predictable but effective.
Inside Delegate Math: The Numbers
Using delegate projection software created by Matt Vogel, I ran a scenario yesterday showing how tough it will be for Hillary Clinton to catch up to Barack Obama's earned delegate lead.
Some of you have asked for my specific state-by-state projections.
So let's go state-by-state, again assuming that the full sanctions levied by the DNC are kept in place.
Ohio: Clinton wins by 4% and earns a net of 5 delegates Rhode Island: Clinton wins by 10% and earns a net of 3 delegates Texas: Obama wins by a net of 8% and earns a net of 15 delegates including those taken from the caucus portion of the contests Vermont: Obama wins handily and nets 3 delegates.
We can fiddle with the numbers a bit, but winning by an extra percent in Texas is worth more than winning by an extra percent in Ohio. If Clinton wins by 8 percentage points in Ohio, she picks up a net of about 11 delegates compared to Obama's 15 in Texas. Let's be nice to Clinton and assume that she manages to eek out a win in Texas, giving her 3 extra delegates. For the day, she'd net only 8 delegates under this scenario -- with Texas and Vermont having cancelled each other out.
Moving on to Wyoming, let's assume, generously, that Obama only wins by 55%. He picks up 2 delegates. Then comes Mississippi. Let's assume the split is 60/40, Obama -- he picks up 7 delegates, and so -- since March 4 -- he's back up 1.
Flash forward to Pennsylvania, and let's assume that Hillary Clinton manages to win 60% of the vote in the state. She'll earn 32 extra delegates -- her biggest net gain so far.
I'll give the next two states and a territory to Obama -- by six points only each -- Guam (+0 net), Indiana (+4 net) and North Carolina (+7 net). Hillary Clinton has a shot to win West Virginia, which votes on March 13, so let's assume she wins by 10 points, earning a net of two extra delegates. Momentum carries over into Kentucky, which she wins by 10 points and earns five extra delegates. She's not going to win Oregon, probably -- Obama picks up six delegates there.
The June 3 primaries of Montana and South Dakota are probably Obama's: let's assume he wins them by 10 points, earning a total of 3 net delegates.
The last contest is the Puerto Rico caucuses, which takes place on June 7. Let's give Hillary Clinton an 80 to 20 victory there, giving her a net of 33 earned delegates.
So -- under these most rosy of scenarios -- since March 4, she'll have earned 520 delegates to Barack Obama's 461, having reduced his earned delegate total by about 80 -- or -- by about 60 percent -- but he'll still have a lead of approximately 100 delegates in total... and be that much closer to 2025.
Sen. Jay Rockefeller Endorses Obama
Arguably, the man who knows more about the present threats to the United States than any other Democrats -- he is the chairman of senate intelligence committee and gets to see all the top secret / codeword stuff -- Sen. Jay. Rockefeller -- endorses Sen. Barack Obama.
“As Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, I am all too aware that the threats we face are unconventional. They are sophisticated. They are constantly changing and adapting. And they are very serious. What matters most in the Oval Office is sound judgment and decisive action. It’s about getting it right on crucial national security questions the first time – and every time.
“The indisputable fact is Barack Obama was right about Iraq when many of us were wrong. It was a tough call and the single greatest national security question, and mistake, of our time. Today, we remain a country at war, and countless mistakes over the last six and a half years have made us less safe. The stakes have never been higher, and that is why we must take a stand.
If you're Hillary Clinton, this one stings.
Oh, El Rushbo.....
Sen. John McCain is spending the weekend at his ranch in Sedona, Arizona with members of his traveling press corps.
The festivities are on-the-record. Or so I am told by two members of the press.
Barack Obama doesn't have the warm and fuzzies for his press contingent and every casual encounter between him and them is painfully negotiated between, usually, the AP reporter and Robert Gibbs.
Aides/strategists/thinkers within Obama campaign have several theories about whether McCain's accessibility will benefit him in a two-person race. One theory holds that Obama's brand is sui generis; the darned press corps is so eager to unfairly parse his every word and bring him to down to earth; less is more.
There are some folks in the Obama campaign who want Obama to speak to the press more often and more casually. These folks have, so far, lost their arguments.
But that could change.
Making The Rounds Of The Bitter Conservative Blogs Today
(Yes, Sen. McCain really did say this..)
Obama Veepstakes
How irresponsible of me.
Ok, with that out of the way...
Let us first note that Barack Obama is not John Kerry and is endowed with entirely different political imperatives. Kerry chose Edwards, we've learned in retrospect, because of politics, not because he felt Edwards could be president from day one, or because he felt some kinship with the smooth-talkin' lawyer from Robbins. The choice of Edwards and the demands it placed on the ticket will undoubtedly influence Mr. Obama's decision.
James Johnson, who was Kerry's veepstakes czar, is a major fundraiser for Obama and an informal adviser, and no doubt will urge him to first, choose someone with whom he is personally comfortable and can trust. I believe, but I do not know for sure, that this will be Obama's first and most private criterion: can I trust this guy (gal?) implicitly?
CW says that the first rule is "Do no harm." But that ain't right. The first rule is: Do I like this person?
Obama's evident political void is national security and executive experience; his first, public criterion will most definitely be: can this person be commander in chief? Can they pass the "red phone" test? ... followed by ... Can this person run a government?
It stands to reason that the largest nest of potential veep prospects contains old white men. And here are, on the basis of nothing but educated guesses, some of the names I believe that Obama will think about, when he starts to think about his selections.
Sam Nunn -- His thinking on nuclear proliferation has already influenced Obama's; both favor unilateral disarmament now; Nunn has the right geographic bonafides; he knows the generals and Obama does not;
Tim Roemer -- a 9/11 commissioner and former congressman from Indiana, Roemer has endorsed Obama; he's pro-life
Lee Hamilton -- he's quietly become of Obama's top foreign policy advisers; as a 9/11 commissioner, he built consensus, often to the detriment, some have said, of harder-edged conclusions.
Evan Bayh -- He's endorsed Hillary Clinton, but he's been a passive surrogate and hasn't participated in any activity that would offend Obama's sensibilities. He's a veteran of the intelligence and armed services committees and remains very popular in Indiana, where he's remembered as a tax-cutting Dem governor.
Joe Biden -- no Democrat gets foreign policy better than Joe Biden; no Democrat would be, in theory, a better steward of relations on the Hill than Biden; he'd be a fantastic surrogate and there'd be virtually no downside to picking him.
Wild cards: Chuck Hagel, Hillary Clinton, Jim Webb,
The American Prospect, in its March issue, has a list of the Usual Suspects, starting with Jim Webb ("miliary credentials," "Virginia," "white working class,"), Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (though the Prospect notes that she sort of flubbed her SOTU reaction address), Ohio's Ted Strickland (ah, but he endorsed HRC), Sen. Ken Salazar (not gonna happen), Biden, Napolitano, Schweitzer and others on the "bench," including Govs. Vilsack, Richardson and Bayh.
Next week, maybe, I'll write one of these about Hillary Clinton....
An Alternate Theory About Texas
Texas Democratic activist Glenn Smith writes on MyDD:
The campaign in Texas is close. Delegates selected by popular vote out of the 31 Senate districts will probably be split more or less evenly. This is due in large part to the fact that 15 of those districts have 4 delegates to award. A candidate would have to get more than 62.5 percent of the vote in those districts to win a 3-to-1 split. The most likely outcome is a 2-2 split. In addition, Obama may have a slight advantage in that the districts with the largest number of delegates, Austin and inner city Houston and Dallas, are viewed as Obama strongholds. Still, just about every model shows an even split of primary vote delegates, no matter who wins or loses the popular vote. This is just because the vote will be close.
The Clinton campaign strategy is to justify taking the fight beyond Texas even if they fall further behind Obama in the national delegate count. To do that, they must cast doubt over the fate of the 67 delegates that will be chosen at the caucus level. Hence, their tough positioning in phone calls with Texas Democratic Party officials and others involved in the primary here.
In a few minutes, the Obama campaign will hold a conference call to discuss what they're calling the "Clinton lawsuit threat."
4 More Superdelegates For Obama
They are:
Brian Melendez, the chair of the Minnesota DFL
Donna Cassutt, the associate chair of the Minnesota DFL
Renee Pfenning, a DNC member from North Dakota
Rep. Yvonne Davis of Texas
Unless Obama Wins, He Loses
Huh?
To: Interested Parties
From: The Clinton Campaign
Date: Friday, February 29, 2008
RE: Obama Must-Wins
The media has anointed Barack Obama the presumptive nominee and he's playing the part.
With an eleven state winning streak coming out of February, Senator Obama is riding a surge of momentum that has enabled him to pour unprecedented resources into Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont.
The Obama campaign and its allies are outspending us two to one in paid media and have sent more staff into the March 4 states. In fact, when all is totaled, Senator Obama and his allies have outspent Senator Clinton by a margin of $18.4 million to $9.2 million on advertising in the four states that are voting next Tuesday.
Senator Obama has campaigned hard in these states. He has spent time meeting editorial boards, courting endorsers, holding rallies, and - of course - making speeches.
If he cannot win all of these states with all this effort, there's a problem.
Should Senator Obama fail to score decisive victories with all of the resources and effort he is bringing to bear, the message will be clear:
Democrats, the majority of whom have favored Hillary in the primary contests held to date, have their doubts about Senator Obama and are having second thoughts about him as a prospective standard-bearer.
Obama Reacts To "Red Phone"
According to CBS News's Maria Gavrilovic, who is on the trail with Obama:
"We’ve seen these ads before. They’re the kind that play on peoples’ fears to scare up votes."
"Well it won’t work this time. Because the question is not about picking up the phone. The question is – what kind of judgment will you make when you answer? We’ve had a red phone moment. It was the decision to invade Iraq. And Senator Clinton gave the wrong answer. George Bush gave the wrong answer. John McCain gave the wrong answer."
3:00 a.m: Roy Spence's Redux
Roy Spence, the Texas-based advertizing wizard brought aboard to soften Hillary Clinton's image after Super Tuesday, is the maestro behind Clinton's most audacious advertisement to date, a Clinton campaign official said this morning.
And Spence is very familiar with the genre. It was his "red phone" ad -- see it here -- that helped seed doubts about Gary Hart's credentials to be commander in chief.
Here's the original "Red phone" ad; it's become an archetype.
In 1984, Mondale beat Hart by more than 30 points in Texas.
More On The Clinton Campaign And The Texas "Lawsuit"
I asked Guy Cecil, the national political director for the Clinton campaign, where he ""forcefully raise[d] the prospect of a courtroom battle?" as suggested by the Houston Chroncile.
"Absolutely not. There was no threat, 'direct or veiled' to engage in litigation. We asked that the results of the call be put in writing," he said.
Mo Elliethee, a Clinton campaign spokesman, elaborated for me.
"The campaigns have been discussing primary night procedures and we asked for those procedures to be put in writing before we agree to them. It is standard operating procedure for our campaign - and we presume any campaign - to see what we are agreeing to in writing before we agree to it."
My guess is that the campaign is worried about what happens when the voting stops and the caucus starts and believes that the Texas Democratic Party isn't prepared to run the caucuses competently. Remember, Texas awards delegates in two parts; two thirds to the winners of 31 state senate district primaries, allocated proportionally; and then to the winners of a statewide caucus; only those voters who can prove they voted in the primaries can participate in the caucus.
The call where Cecil allegedly made his threats lasted ninety minutes long and featured participants from both campaigns. By singling Cecil's request to put the party's interpertation of its caucus rules on paper, the party might simply be trying to ward off potential challenges to its procedures on caucus night... or trying to embarass the Clinton campaign.
Clinton's "Red Phone"
Perhaps the most provocative ad Hillary Clinton has run this cycle. It's bound to evoke comparisons to LBJ's "Daisy" ad and Walter Mondale's "Red Phone" ads -- asking the essential question: if the White House phone rings at 3:00 am and there's a crisis brewing, who do you want on the other end of the line? Arguably, this is her best ... argument .. against Barack Obama, and yet it's taken her 13 months to make it so explicitly.
ANNCR: It's 3am and your children are safe and asleep.
But there's a phone in the White House and it's ringing.
Something's happening in the world.
Your vote will decide who answers that call.
Whether it's someone who already knows the world's leaders.knows the
military.someone tested and ready to lead in a dangerous world.
It's 3am and your children are safe and asleep.
Who do you want answering the phone?
Hillary Clinton: I am Hillary Clinton and I approve this message.
The Texas Democratic Party warned Thursday that election night caucuses scheduled for Tuesday could be delayed or disrupted after aides to Hillary Rodham Clinton threatened to sue over the party's complicated delegate selection process.
In a letter sent out late Thursday to both the Clinton and Barack Obama campaigns, Texas Democratic Party lawyer Chad Dunn warned a lawsuit could ruin the Democrats' effort to re-energize voters just as they are turning out in record numbers.
The Clinton campaign denies this up and down and the stories doesn't make clear why the state party was so convinced that the Clintons intended to file a suit. Nevertheless, watch for the headline alone to generate some unfavorable news coverage in TX today.
CTV Retracts....
Mark Kleiman on a day of dial downs, retractions, and walk-backs.
CTV now alleges a "conversation" between Obama adviser Austan Goolsbee and the Canadian consulate in Chicago.
February 28, 2008
How Many Delegates Does HRC Need To Win?
In order to win the nomination, how many earned delegates does Sen. Hillary Clinton have to win?
It's not an academic question. With a little spreadsheet math, we can figure it out.
We need to start with some assumptions.
First, let’s be generous and assume that all of the superdelegates Clinton currently claims will not switch to Obama.
Perhaps that’s an overly generous assumption given that two have done so over the past two days, but, again, we’re trying to illuminate a path to the nomination, not block one. Let’s assume that, all other things being equal, she’ll win half of the remaining uncommitted superdelegates – maybe 185 of 390. She’ll also win half of John Edward’s delegates.
Before we move to pledged delegates, we need to figure out whether Florida and Michigan delegations are credentials and what effect they’ll have on the nomination. At this point, it’s most likely that they will be segregated from the official nomination scenarios.
So – just for the moment – let us calculate the number of remaining 981 pledged delegates Hillary Clinton would need to earn in order to win the nomination without the help of Michigan and Florida.
Assuming that her currently total is 1275 – a nice amalgam of the various network and print delegate estimates, she needs at least 55.3% -- or about 542.
Let’s go to March 4. Let’s assume that Clinton wins Ohio by four points – 52 to 48, netting her roughly 5 extra delegates, and loses Texas 49 to 51, netting Obama three extra delegates, and loses Vermont, netting Obama three extra delegates, and winning Rhode Island by 6 points, netting herself an extra delegate. She ends that day with no additional delegates – she can blame Vermont.
Under the rosiest of scenarios, it’s hard to see her winning more than about 50 percent of the remaining earned delegates, even if she whips Obama in Pennsylvania and earns, say, 16 extra delegates, and drums him in Puerto Rico, where, even if she wins seventy percent of the delegates, she’s still, in essence, playing catch up.
If Clinton wins half of the remaining delegates – about 493 – and loses none – she still trails Obama by a net 50 or so earned delegates.
Now let’s run the scenario with Florida and Michigan’s delegates in play – the best iteration of that scenario, with both pledged and unpledged delegates seated and Clinton’s having earned fully 60% of or more of them. She’ll need at least 52.1% of remaining pledged delegates to surpass Obama.
Playing with the numbers a bit, here’s how she could – in theory – accomplish this.
If Florida and Michigan's delegations are seated fully to her advantage, and if she wins in Ohio by 65% and wins in Texas by 65%, and all other percentages hold, she can win the nomination.
HIllary Clinton As An Efficiently Priced Security
A theory, developed in conjunction with reader M.V., about why she's had trouble.
Clinton is like an efficiently priced security: the market -- i.e., the voting public -- already possessed an enormous amount of information about her.
Changing your support for a candidate is highly liquid, and that virtually everything that you could say or think about her has essentially been priced in. (Experience, Bill Clinton, strength, toughness, etc.)
Events push her numbers up or down but, at it's root, the overall national market puts her around 40%.
She has probably the least volatile polling track record in recent American history. (Try to find any other presidential candidate in the last three decades with as flat a national tracking number in the 12 months prior to the nomination being decided, or six months, or even three months.)
Second: It's also probably the first time in history of presidential primaries (of either party) that someone with the apparently unflinching support of 40% of voters from the outset couldn't move more than 1 in 6 of the remaining 60% to go on and win.
And these are Democrats!
Obama Outraises Clinton In February
Hillary Clinton's campaign will report raising approximately $35m in February, a record sum for the campaign.
But though Barack Obama's campaign is keeping mum, you can bet that somewhere in Chicago, David Plouffe is cracking a smile.
That's because the campaign is expected to announce having raised more than $50M this month, breaking all records and all expectations.
Fred Wertheimer Clarifies
A statement about his statement:
Democracy 21 did not say that Senator John McCain cannot withdraw from the presidential primary public financing system until the Federal Election Commission makes a decision in this case.
We said that the shut down of the FEC has “taken center stage” because there is no agency to make a legal determination of whether McCain can or cannot withdraw from the public financing system. That means that their will be no resolution of the legal question involved here until the agency is re-constituted to decide the legal issue, and if such an FEC decision is appealed, the case is decided by the courts.
The importance of the legal question, and the need for it to be resolved quickly, is what has shed light on the deadlock in the Senate over the confirmation of four pending nominees to serve as FEC commissioners – a deadlock caused by Senator Mitch McConnell’s refusal to allow a simple up-or-down vote on each of the four pending nominees.
Democracy 21 did not take a position on whether McCain can or cannot legally withdraw from the system. That question, we said, raises “novel and complex” issues of both campaign finance and commercial banking law that will need to be decided by the FEC and potentially by the courts.
NAFTA Bluster? The Report That's Making Waves In Canada
A secret message from the Obama campaign to the Canadian government, cautioning against reading too much into Obama's rhetoric about rolling back NAFTA? It's the story of the day up north, but the Obama campaign today denies this up and down.
“The news reports on Obama's position on NAFTA are inaccurate and in no way represent Senator Obama’s consistent position on trade. When Senator Obama says that he will forcefully act to make NAFTA a better deal for American workers, he means it. Both Canada and Mexico should know that, as president, Barack Obama will do what it takes to create and protect American jobs and strengthen the American economy -- that includes amending NAFTA to include labor and environmental standards. We are currently reaching out to the Canadian embassy to correct this inaccuracy."
Update: The Canadian embassy also denies the report.
Still -- international intrigue. Backchannel diplomacy. Secret envoys. It's all very... presidential...
Natural Born
Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton (and the Democratic Party) won't make a fuss about whether John McCain was "natural born" and thus constitutionally eligible to serve as president... but nothing prevents some mischievous group... Democrats.com? MoveOn? Judicial Watch? someone else? ... from making a federal case out of it.
Barry Goldwater and George Romney would have been test cases... alas...
Wertheimer: McCain Can't Opt Out Until FEC Is Functioning
I think I might have missed the significance of Fred Wertheimer's statement about John McCain's tangle with the FEC.
The shut down of the Federal Election Commission has taken center stage because there is no functioning agency to deal with the issue of whether bank loans taken out by Senator John McCain (R-AZ), and the collateral provided for those bank loans, means that Senator McCain cannot withdraw from the presidential primary public financing system and is bound by its spending limits for the rest of his primary campaign.
So -- In Wertheimer's opinion, McCain can't opt out until the FEC decides whether he can?
The Full Obama Video: Caucus For Priorities
Here's the full video... of which 52 seconds became viral yesterday in conservative circles.
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is not, not, not running for president, according to an op-ed he's written for tomorrow's New York Times.
His shots aren't parting, though:
WATCHING the 2008 presidential campaign, you sometimes get the feeling that the candidates — smart, all of them — must know better. They must know we can’t fix our economy and create jobs by isolating America from global trade. They must know that we can’t fix our immigration problems with border security alone. They must know that we can’t fix our schools without holding teachers, principals and parents accountable for results. They must know that fighting global warming is not a costless challenge. And they must know that we can’t keep illegal guns out of the hands of criminals unless we crack down on the black market for them. The vast majority of Americans know that all of this is true, but — politics being what it is — the candidates seem afraid to level with them.
Adelfa Callejo, Welcome To The Spotlight
From New York Daily News reporter Michael McAuliffe's pool report. He was with Sen. Clinton today for a round of satellite interviews.
She was asked by KTVT in Dallas about a Latina backer who said that black politicians never do anything for Hispanics. Her name is Adelfa Callejo. Apparently she’s 84.
[The question: "She recently told us that African-Americans never help Hispanics when they gain power and influence and that she would never vote for Sen. Obama, and now quoting here she said 'Obama’s problem is that he happens to be black.' How do you react to those comments?"]
The newscaster quoted her saying “Obama’s problem is that he happens to be black.”
Clinton: “Well obviously I want us judged on our merits. I believe strongly that the fact that we have an Aftrican Ameircan and a woman running for the Democratic nomination is historical and I’m very very proud of that . I want people thought to look beyond, look beyond race and gender, look at our records, look what we stand for, look what we’ve done and I think that;s what most voters are looking for.”
Q (paraphrase) Is this something you reject and denounce?
“People have every reason to express their opinions. I just don’t agree with that. I think that we should be looking at the individuals who are running.”
Q - Do you still want her support, though?
Clinton laughed and said, “You know This is a free country. People get to express their opinions. A lot of folks have said really unpleasant things about me over the course of this campaign. You can’ take any of that as anything other than an individual opinion.”
“I would urge all of my supporters and Sen. Obama’s supporters to stay focused on the two of us,. Don’t vote on race don’t vote on gender, vote on the qualifications each of us present for the presidency."
Q- But you criticized Obama for not rejecting the support form Farrakhan,
“I don’t see any comparison at all with what you’re referring to and I don’t know the facts of what you’re telling me over the TV. So I’m just going to repeat that I want people to judge us on the merits.”
Fred Wertheimer Weighs In
Democracy 21's Fred Wertheimer weighs on, sort of, on Sen. McCain's dispute with the Federal Election Commission. His full response after the jump.
What Do McCain's Public Interest Group Allies Say About His Campaign Finance Claims?
I've wondered this, as have others. So far, there's been mostly radio silence, particularly from groups like the Campaign Legal Center and Democracy 21, both with deep ties to McCain, both with deep roots with the campaign finance legislation reform community, both usually quick to the draw when lawmakers attempt to interpret election laws to their advantage.
Larry Gold has attempted an answer. He has the credentials, being a litigator of McConnell v. FEC before the Supreme Court. He is a critic of McCain's.
Like others, I have been awaiting with interest the analysis of these important matters from the Campaign Legal Center (CLC) and Democracy 21 (D21). CLC and D21 are ardent advocates and litigants on the ethical and legal behavior of candidates, political parties, unions, corporations and other private organizations with respect to politics and lobbying, they are often quoted by the media as objective and authoritative arbiters of such behavior, and they rely on their media relationships for their own fundraising and influence. Ordinarily, CLC and D21 would be outspoken about an imbroglio concerning a presumptive presidential nominee’s belated effort to withdraw from public financing at a time when the FEC is raising legitimate procedural and substantive questions about his doing so. And, ordinarily they would be quick to weigh in about potentially unethical contacts between a lawmaker and lobbyists and possible attempts to cover them up.
"[D]on’t CLC and D21 believe that Senator McCain is now trying to exploit a “loophole” in that system, isn’t he violating at least the “spirit” of the law, and doesn’t his current effort to withdraw from his public-funding commitment seek to “circumvent the rules”?"]
Regardless of whether McCain is doing something nefarious -- whether he's violating the spirit or letter or intent or a law, his assertions have raised the type of questions that the Campaign Legal Center and Democracy 21 usually jump into in earnest. Indeed, both groups have been vocal in urging Barack Obama to abide by the pledge he made last year to enter into the public financing system for the general election provided his opponent did so.
A spokesperson at Democracy 21 said: "We have not put out any statements."
Dave Vance, at the Campaign Legal Center, acknowledged the perceptual pressure his organization faced. Its president, Trevor Potter, is McCain's general counsel. Mr. Potter has taken a leave of absence from the group, although he "might be talking to people on behalf of fundraising," Vance said. As for McCain, "he happens to be on the same page as us for reasons for political expediency right now."
I asked Vance whether the CLC would hesitate to take a shot at McCain if he violated any of the CLC's principles.
"No," he said.
In truth, the matter is complex and turns on fairly obscure points of law that the CLC and Democracy 21 usually wouldn't be expected to master, much less to advocate for. But it's no doubt a cautionary tale for them: their critics will be watching how they respond to McCain's every interaction with campaign finance.
Richardson Moves Toward An Endorsement, Likes Obama
New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson is being coy with his inner circle and hasn't told them who he'll endorse for president. But he's sure said a lot of nice things about Barack Obama.
And Richardson was irate, according to several sources (including the New York Times) when a "senior Clinton official" -- I'm told this was former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright -- called him to pressure him into endorsing Hillary Clinton.
Audio Podcast
Not sure what to call it, but myself, Ross Douthat and Megan McArdle just sat down, turned on the tape recorder, and talked to each other about the news of the day: Obama, Clinton and the death of William F. Buckley, Jr. Listen here.
Rep. John Lewis Switches His Superdelegate Status To Barack Obama
Tennessee Republican Party Slams Barack "Hussein" Obama
On Monday, the Tennessee Republican Party dropped the H-bomb, adorning a press release with Barack Obama's middle name, Hussein, and associated him the Muslim religion by running the 2006 photograph of the candidate wearing Somali tribal clothing.
Here's the first paragraph of the release:
The Tennessee Republican Party today joins a growing chorus of Americans concerned about the future of the nation of Israel, the only stable democracy in the Middle East, if Sen. Barack Hussein Obama is elected president of the United States.
Ostensibly, the press release was written to react to Louis Farrakhan's Sunday endorsement of Obama.
A Knoxville, TN newspaper reports that the Tennessee Republican Party stands by the release in its entirety on the grounds that it "has to inform the base" of Obama's background.
An RNC spokesman did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The news media in TN is circling, though, ensuring that the story will remain alive for a while down there.
Update Part II: A "clarification" on the website now reads:
This release originally referenced a photo of Sen. Obama and incorrectly termed it to be “”Muslim” garb. It is, in fact, Somali tribal garb, hence, we have deleted the photo. Also, in order to diffuse attempts by Democrats and the Left to divert attention from the main point of this release - that Sen. Obama has surrounded himself with advisers and recieved endorsements from people who are anti-Semitic and anti-Israel - we have deleted the use of Barack Obama’s middle nam
Illegal Forward Pass....
At 4:58 in the p.m. yesterday, Sen. John McCain's hard-working headquarters deputy communications director, Brian Rogers, forwarded to the campaign press list the statement released by McCain's Senate office on Sen. Russ Feingold's Iraq withdrawal bill.
He was trying to be helpful.
But it turns out that Senate ethics rules frown on such forwarding of official Senate press releases from campaign e-mail addresses.
It's a minor thing... and totally inadvertent... but the commissar of Senate ethics has an extra obligation to be fully attentive to these rules, especially as the Democratic National Committee is not going to give McCain one mole of breathing room over the next six months.
Some Thoughts On WFB
He proved that, even in late 20th century, ideas matter and can change governments, minds and history; he produced the intellectual fertilizer that grew the conservative movement from Goldwater to Reagan; He was astonishingly gracious for a man of his position, intellectually honest to a fault; if you are a liberal you should acknowledge his contribution to at least the basic structure of politics. He came to oppose the Iraq war, he was noticably more sympathetic to gay people (and perhaps to civil unions) as he grew older; he believed that conservatism under George W. Bush had lost its way; he was humble enough to allow his magazine to prosper under editors who thought differently. His was a conservatism of doubt.
I’m devastated to report that our dear friend, mentor, leader, and founder William F. Buckley Jr., died overnight in his study in Stamford, Connecticut.
After year of illness, he died while at work; if he had been given a choice on how to depart this world, I suspect that would have been exactly it. At home, still devoted to the war of ideas.
As you might expect, we’ll have much more to say here and in NR in the coming days and weeks and months. For now: Thank you, Bill. God bless you, now with your dear Pat. Our deepest condolences to Christopher and the rest of the Buckley family. And our fervent prayer that we continue to do WFB’s life’s work justice.
Vine, vide, vice.
Here's Your Public Financing, McCain
"This is why Barack Obama is hedging from his pledge to accept public financing for the general election."
"So, he's changing his mind as the circumstances warrant?"
"Yep."
"Isn't that cynical?"
"Depends. He could argue that the collective action of 1,000,000 people voluntarily deciding to contribute money to his campaign is much more democratic than a government-imposed levy on the taxpayer."
"But wouldn't McCain be able to say that Obama is putting political expediency before principle here?"
"He could say that. But what's the principle? When Obama agreed -- and I do think he agreed -- to accept public financing if the Republican did, he had no idea that he would be able to fund his campaign from a donor base that was so broad as to essentially remove from the table the appearance of corruption or unfairness."
"But it's not fair to McCain."
"Exactly. Obama is orgnanically more exciting than McCain.""
"Hold on. There's a structural imbalance, too. Democats are raising much more money from the internet and have done so, ever since Howard Dean pioneered the phenominon in 2003."
"Well, actually, John McCain kind of pioneered this in 2000, when he raised $1,000,000 the week after winning the New Hampshire primary. But I concede the point. One of the biggest structural disadvantages the Republican Party faces over the next generation is that they haven't found an alternative source of revenue. The older generation of ideological and corporate donors are fading away. There is no replacement cohort."
"I still think Obama is fudging on a pledge."
"And McCain will certainly argue as much. But if Obama gets 1,000,000 people to contribute $100 dollars for the general election, McCain will be forced to someone construe that as a bad thing for democracy."
Rove: Don't "Hussein" Obama
No less an authority figure than Karl Rove has warned Republican operatives from demagoguing Barack Obama's middle name.
At a closed door meeting of GOP state executive directors in late January, Rove said the safest way to refer to Obama would be to use his honorific, "Sen. Obama."
"The context was, you're not going to stimatize this guy. You shouldn't underestimate him," one of the executive directors said. Rove said that the use of "Barack Hussein Obama" would perpetuate the notion that Republicans were bigoted and would hurt the party.
Rove also said that Republicans should refer to Hillary Clinton as "Sen. Clinton," rather than "Hillary."
Right wing figures are set to ignore Rove's advice. Rush Limbaugh used Obama's middle name more than a year ago, and Ann Coulter regularly uses the middle name, once calling him "President Hussein." So does Michael Savage, who once asked whether Obama was a "so-called friendly Muslim" or one more "radical."
Los Angeles Times Poll Shows Clinton Shedding Voters
Overall, the spread is Obama 48% and Clinton 42%.
Obama now runs even among women, even among those who didn't get a college degree and even among those aged 45 to 64. Clinton still runs strong among men and women over aged 65 and women who don't work. Obama wins married women by 11 points.
42% of Republicans say that Barack Obama would be the toughest candidate for John McCain to b beat in November.
The Times poll has McCain beating Clinton outside the margin of error (46% to 40%) and beating Obama by only 2 points.
So far as I can tell, the difference between the Times poll and other polls showing Obama beating McCain is that independents in the Times poll are more evenly split, where Obama, in the CBS/NYT poll, led among independents.
February 26, 2008
Vantage Point
On substance: Clinton. On style: Obama.
You cannot, said Chesterton, love a thing without wanting to fight for it. If Clinton was the underdog tonight, she kept the upper dog on the defensive for most of the night. Near the end, for example, when Clinton interrupted and badgered him into denouncing the Nation of Islam leader even more fulsomely.
Toward the end, Obama made three fairly significant hedges, the first of which being about the Russian President to be, Dimitry Medvevev. Although Clinton had trouble pronouncing his name -- Medvevev, it was clear that she knew it, and that she was at least cursorily familiar with the details of the election and the challenge it poses for the U.S. As NBC News’s hounds noted, Obama appeared to defer to her. If you were watching closely, you might have wondered whether Obama had received a briefing recently on Russia, rather than a recitation of the case against George W. Bush’s relationship with Putin.
Before that there were was his weird language about the endorsement by Louis Farrakhan. There are some things you just don’t do in American politics: calling Farrakhan “minister Farrakhan” is one of them. He’s been declared persona non grata by everyone in the mainstream of our politics. It seemed to take badgering by Clinton for Obama to reject it explicitly (although he did not embrace it and had distanced himself from it before). I don't think Obama's at fault here... I think the circumstances conspired against him... but it just didn't sound right...
And before that there was Obama’s hedging on public financing in the general election.
I suspect, though, that Clinton’s intemperate complaint about the NBC’s debate reflecting the Saturday Night Live parody will be what the morning shows dissect and dissect, and beyond that, there was really nothing else to commend to the new viewer. Ohioans concerned about NAFTA learned that Clinton changed her mind about the efficacy of the trade agreement and about her promise to threaten to pull out of the treaty unless Canada and Mexico renegotiate its terms; me too, said Obama. The two candidates fought to a draw over mandates; there doesn’t seem to be a truth there one can actually find. Obama had some strong moments, particularly, as usual, on Iraq. His two best lines: how Clinton was responsible for getting the country "into the ditch" that both of them were trying to get out of, and how she was ready from day one to "enable" Bush to take the country to war.
I hesitate to point out her body language, if only because I can easily read too much into it. But she seemed tense, remorseful, sad, at times… her neck seemed leaden; her voice had an edge that all to often crossed the boundary between assertive and plaintive.
Obama seemed more solicitous and upbeat. Even as he was defensive, he was passive-defensive; he was oh-so-cool; one e-mailer, recalling Twain, called him a Christian with four aces. He seemed to be listening to Hillary Stagg with one ear and to Hillary Clinton with the other.
Bottom line: did this, the 20th debate, change much? Probably not.
Democratic Debate Part III
Obama ends with a bit of a reverse "moment"...praises HRC...says she's a "magnificant" campaigner... taking away her chance to land a last-minute punch....saying he looks forward to working with her...."there's no doubt that Hillary Clinton would be a much better president than John McCain..."
HRC does know Medvevev's name but has trouble pronouncing it, while Obama brings it back to Bush...
Russert's "Gotcha question"... the name of the President-would-be is Dmitry Medvedev , btw.
Obama bashes National Journal, which judged him the most liberal Senator...
HRC notes that she rejected the support of a third party in NYC that was anti-Semitic...by way of contrast to Obama. "I was willing to take that stand..." Obama concedes the point.
Russert moves on to Rev. Jeremiah Wright.... Obama talks about wanting to rebuilding the relationship between the Jewish community and the black community....
Obama: "I have been very clear in my denunciation of minister Farrakhan's anti-Semitic comments." It is "not support that I sought. We're not doing anything formal or informally with minister Farrakhan."
HRC: "The American people who support me are bankrolling your campaign."
Russert to HRC: "Why won't you release your tax return" so the Am people "can see who is bankrolling your campaign?"
Russert: "You may break out of public financing? You may break your word?"
On public financing: is Obama waffling? "Why won't won't you keep your word in writing?" Obama: "When I am the nominee, if I an the nominee, then I will sit down with John McCain and make sure that we have a system that is fair for both sides..."....mentions McCain's maneuvering within the system so far... "What I want to point out more broadly is how we approached this campaign from the beginning..."
Obama: "There's nothing romantic or silly..." about getting the American people "activated" for change.
HRC: "I know it takes a fighter. It takes someone who will go toe-to-toe with the special interests...." Explainer her "celestial choirs" comments.... "The special interests are not going to give up without a fight."
What? They played the tape in error? Softball? "How did you take those remarks when she said them? Obama: "I would give her points for delivery."
HRC: after a commercial, NBC plays the "celestial choirs will be singing" riff that HRC went on over the weekend... Obama: "sounds good" ....
HRC goes after Obama for not holding hearings as a Foreign Relations subcommittee chair on Afghanistan....
Both candidates refuse to say whether they'd go back into Iraq if it "went to hell" after withdrawal....
Clinton Team Not Happy With Debate Questions....
A Clinton adviser: "This feels like it ****is**** SNL."
The 20th Democratic Debate: Part II
I have many friends at NBC News, but the questions to HRC seem tougher than the questions to Obama. For example: Brian Williams asked: "How were her comments about you unfair?"
Obama: "She was ready on day one...to give into George Bush."
The RNC is paying attention to Obama again.. four releases against him... none mentioning HRC.
HRC wraps Obama's Iraq speech in '02...with her "speeches, not action" theme
Russert: HRC, you pledged 200K new jobs for upstate New York..there's been a net loss of 37K jobs... notes that she pledges 5M new jobs...
Finally: Russert notices that Obama has been "ambivalent" about NAFTA. Obama says HRC's answer is right.
HRC seems to have an edge in her voice. The substance of her answers is sound. But emotions seem to be just under the surface... Maybe I'm reading too much into this.
HRC: "We will opt out of NAFTA unless we renegotiate it. Let's be fair here, Tim. There are lots of parts of New York that have benefited. But the problem is in places like upstate New York, Youngstown, Toledo, it hasn't."
By the way: is tonight the first time Matt Drudge has been mentioned in any debate?
Obama accuses HRC of "shifting positions" on this.
HRC defends herself on NAFTA.... "I would hope again that we can get to a debate to what the real issues are and where we stand... we do need to fix NAFTA and it is not working.."
HRC: complains about getting the first question: .... "If anyone saw Saturday night live, maybe we should get Barack a pillow and ask if he is comfortable..." The audience hisses a little bit.... seems like she lost her temper.
The 20th Democratic Debate
Obama: "It has to do with how we are going to achieve universal health care." Says same experts that say there's a difference say that difference is very small...
HRC: "It would be as though Franklin Roosevelt said, let's make Social Security voluntary...at the point of employment, at the point of contact, we would have people signed up...it's like when you get a 401K at your employer..."... HRC getting passionate.. there's an edge in her voice
Has HRC ever answered the mandate question? How would she enforce it?
HRC: Re: Obama's Ohio mailings, "It’s almost as though the health insurance companies and the Republicans wrote it."
Haven't we heard this same debate about 14 times?
Obama: "Sen. Clinton has...constantly sent out negative attacks on us...e-mail, robocalls, fliers, television ads...and we haven't whined about it...because I understand that's the nature of these campaigns."
Obama: "I have endured repeated negative mailings..."
HRC: Asked about the Drudge picture... "I certainly know nothing about it.."
HRC: starts on health care.... calls for an "accurate" debate that's "based in facts." "My plan will cover everyone and it is affordable. ... Sen. Obama's plan does not cover everyone."
HRC: "This is a contest campaign. I have a great deal of respect for Sen. Obama, but we have differences."
Yay -- a Clinton video montage!
An Insult, Then An Apology
To make it clear.... it wasn't just that Bill Cunningham used Barack HUSSEIN Obama's middle name over and over and over again when introducing John McCain today in Cincinnati...
"Well my friends now we have a hack, Chicago-style Daley politician who is picturing himself as change. When he gets done with you, all you’re going to have in your pocket is change..."
McCain was aghast; his apology was abject, according to CBS's Dante Higgins.
I regret any comments that may be made about these two individuals who are honorable Americans. We just have strong philosophical differences. And so I want to disassociate myself from any disparaging remarks that may have been said about them.I have never met Mr. Cunningham but I will certainly make sure that nothing like that happens ever again."
An Obama spokesman later responded in kind: "We appreciate Senator McCain’s remarks. It is a sign that if there is a McCain-Obama gen
