The Daily Five:It's All On You

1. Bill Clinton, in Beaumont, Texas today:

"You probably like it that it has come down to Texas and Ohio. If she wins Texas and Ohio I think she will be the nominee, if you don't then I don’t think she can. It's all on you."

2. The Change to Win coalition plans a Thursday a.m conference call to consider a presidential endorsement, according to birthday boy Chris "The Fix" Cillizza.

3. John McCain said today that President Bush should veto legislation that would limit the CIA's interrogation techniques to those specified in the Army Field Manuel. But... no torture.

4. Texas State Sen. Kirk Watson finally has his talking points:

On Tuesday night, after an important and historic victory in the Wisconsin Presidential Primary by Senator Barack Obama, I appeared on the MSNBC post-election program. “Hardball” host Chris Matthews (who is, it turns out, as ferocious as they say), began grilling me on Senator Obama’s legislative record.

And my mind went blank. I expected to be asked about the primary that night, or the big one coming up in Texas on March 4, or just about anything else in the news. When the subject changed so emphatically, I reached for information that millions of my fellow Obama supporters could recite by heart, and I couldn’t summon it.

My most unfortunate gaffe is not, in any way, a comment on Senator Obama, his substantial record, or the great opportunity we all share to elect him President of the United States.

Had I not lost my mind, here are the accomplishments I would have mentioned:

* Senator Obama’s fight for universal children’s health care in Illinois.
* His success bringing Republicans and Democrats together (a huge selling point for me in general) on bills such as the one in Illinois requiring police interrogations and confessions to be videotaped.
* His leadership on ethics reform in Washington (the bill that lobbyists and special interests are complaining about right now has his name on it).
* His bill to make the federal budget far more transparent and accessible to Americans via the Internet – we could use that openness in Texas.
* And his vital work with Republicans to lock down nuclear weapons around the world.

Of course, it would have helped to remember all of this last night. I encourage anyone who wants to know more (especially Mr. Matthews) to log onto texas.barackobama.com.

5. Joe Klein headline: McCain: Soft on Al Qaeda?

Comments

Is It Time for Hillary Clinton to Quit?

With ten successive defeats, the Clinton Camp must be wondering about the future of their campaign. Even if Hillary wins Texas & Ohio (which seems very unlikely), she will not be able to lead in the delegate count. So her camp needs to have a reality check.

Perhaps it is time for the elders of Democratic party to suggest to Hillary that her continuing the campaign will be devisive for the party and it is time for her to concede. She has run a good competitive campaign, she was leading in the polls for the longest time, but the Obama movement has overtaken her and gone well past. It is time for Al Gore and other Democratic stalwarts to step up and bring this to a close.

If Hillary quits now, she will leave on good terms with Obama and will enable the Democratic nominee to preserve cash and energy for campaign against McCain. Also, she may have an important place in an Obama Administration. She could be Secretary of Health implementing the all important healthcare plans that both she and Obama talk about so much.

Also, with Obama's relatively less experience in world affairs, his Administration must leverage Bill Clinton's international experience. Bill could be the President's Special Ambassador for Middle East peace, a project Clinton came so close to accomplishing towards the end of his Presidency but ran out of time. This could be a great opportunity for him to finish what he started.

Posted by Ajaz Haque | February 20, 2008 4:48 PM

I think that at this point in the game we are at a virtual tie with still plenty of time left to go. If you look at the MyDD site's delegate counter, they show Clinton ahead if you count FL and Mi as well as automatic delegates.

If you add to that number John Edwards 39 delegates you have a very viable path to the nomination for Sen. Clinton. Clinton's campaign has played the expectations game marvelously and they have lulled Obama and his supporters into a cocky complacency not unlike prior to New Hampshire.

I fully expect Clinton to win TX and OH but I see Pennsylvania as being her true Firewall where she will start an unstoppable momentum towards the nomination.

Posted by Toobie | February 20, 2008 4:57 PM

The Clintons are promoting a scorched earth policy.

Posted by yiannis | February 20, 2008 5:02 PM

Toobie they have your pony waiting for you at the front desk.

Posted by Keith | February 20, 2008 5:02 PM

Ooh, Toobie even has picked up the new lingo, "automatic delegates". Those nasty super delegates have disappeared.

Toobie, dude, ten game winning streaks do tend to make the winner a little cocky, no doubt. Complacent? Don't bet on it. Some people are finishers, some aren't.

Posted by Pug | February 20, 2008 5:03 PM

Good post by Joe Klein.

Posted by bsd | February 20, 2008 5:07 PM

Automatic delegates should automatically start moving towards Obama in the coming weeks.

Automatic nomination freight train arriving soon!

Posted by Phil | February 20, 2008 5:07 PM

LOL, I love it. Marc, could you be any more dismissive of Kirk Watson's post-fiasco blog post? Not only do you say he "finally" has his "talking points" (i.e., not only is Watson an empty suit, but the Obama campaign sucks for taking so long to get the man his memo), you also do a startlingly efficient job of stripping out everything charmingly self-deprecating (and actually kinda funny) from the post. Go figure.

But hey, whether he's an empty suit or not, at least he's better than this joker:

Mrs. Clinton said she could not begin to explain how the Texas [primary/caucus] system worked. "I had no idea how bizarre it is," she said aboard her plane flying from Wisconsin to Ohio. "We have grown men crying over it."

READY ON DAY ONE!

Posted by Jeff Larson | February 20, 2008 5:16 PM

It's great to see the Daily Five again!
Thanks Marc!

Posted by Jessica | February 20, 2008 5:20 PM

First, a warm welcome back to the Five. Where's this been for, oh, an election cycle?

Marc: Yes, Sen. Watson's got the talking points, but you cut out all of his self-depricating humor. Why? That was the best part.

If Change to Win endorses Obama that's ... Seismic. No one thinks Clinton's coming back. She would not be garnering these endorsements if they did. Harold Ickes can stay on the phone for 24 hours straight if he wants, talking about automatic delegates, manual delegates, semi-automatic delegates, whatever, but the bottomline is that political brass tacks types like the Teamsters and Change to Win would not be touching endorsement land if they couldn't smell the goal line.

Wither Gerald McEntee?

Posted by Dennis Crane | February 20, 2008 5:26 PM

For all of the handwringing and hysterics of the Mainstream Media, Senator Clinton is just where she needs to (and planned to) be at this juncture in the campaign.

It is obvious that her campaign ceded Wisconsin (a State that neighbor's her opponent's home State) to Obama and used it for, what we in the business call, a "framing lab." In this less than significant contest, Senator Clinton was able to test out various contrast narratives for the campaign which she can then successfully employ in TX and OH. Her strategies in WI were largely effective and given another week and better weather probably would have overcome Obama's built in lead and advantage.

Look, Senator Clinton and her campaign knew for a long time that February was going to be a long hard slog and that she was running up against a well-funded establishment candidate in Obama, but once we got past February, Senator Clinton's dominance could commence. I believe that Senator Cllinton has the momentum, the support of Democratic primary voters and she has the all-important advantage among automatic delegates. We have one of the most experienced change-makers in our history in Senator Clinton leading the charge. Count her out at your own peril.

I feel very confident – we're all tied up and this thing is going into overtime.

Posted by Toobie | February 20, 2008 6:11 PM

Something the repugs, certainly don't want you to know.
Nice judge of character John McCain is, his 2nd wife-Cindy is a former drug addict.
http://www.oliverwillis.com/archives/2008/02/20/cindy-mccain/

Posted by Al | February 20, 2008 6:27 PM

Something the repugs, certainly don't want you to know.
Nice judge of character John McCain is, his 2nd wife-Cindy is a former drug addict.
http://www.oliverwillis.com/archives/2008/02/20/cindy-mccain/

Posted by Al | February 20, 2008 6:27 PM

Wow, Toobie, are you saying Hillary planned to be in the position she's in? Because that's the equivalent of saying the Titanic planned to hit that iceberg.

And the "establishment candidate" and "automatic delegates" lines are rich. Whose supporters are supposed to be drinking Kool-Aid?

Posted by Ryno | February 20, 2008 6:31 PM

Toobie:

Okay I'm as supportive of Hillary as anyone but I think that's a bit of a stretch. Nobody plans to lose. I think she has until Texas and Ohio and turn this around, if she loses one of those then it's over.

On another note here is a quote from Obama spokesperson Dan Burton:

"The choice in this election is between more of the same divisive, say-or-do-anything-to-win politics of the past and real change that we can believe in. That's the change that Barack Obama offers, and that's why more and more voters across America are choosing him as our next president."

Calling your Democratic opponent divisive, unprincipled and power-hungry is not evidence of a new way of doing politics.

Change we can believe in? You mean like committing to public financing and then waffling when it looks like it might disadvantage you in an election? That's not change anyone can believe in.

Posted by Tim K | February 20, 2008 6:50 PM

Good points Tim,

I don't think that it is so much planning to lose as much as playing a masterful expectations game. I don't make any excuses about WI even though Senator Clinton's opponent outspent her 4 - 1 and the winter weather probably prevented many of Senator Clinton's constituency from voting.

Despite this close loss last night, Senator Clinton was able to initiate several very savy contrast narratives that will serve her well in the more critical upcoming contests.

Also, I don't see TX as being particularly critical. Although I expect Senator Clinton to prevail there, I see Pennsylvania as being her "Firewall." One thing that the Media and many detractors are losing site of however are her overwhelming victories in MI and FL which have yet to be (but most surely will be) seated giving Senator Clinton an insurmountablle advantage in perception if not an outright delegate advantage.

Posted by Toobie | February 20, 2008 7:10 PM

Toobie:

Well I think Ohio and Texas are critical in that I don't see how she can overcome his lead in pledged delegates (or at least narrow his advantage) without winning those states. Plus how can she maintain a lead in Pennsylvania if she keeps losing contests.

I think she really needs to go after him in the debate tomorrow night. Really try to rattle his cage. And I think it's time for some hard-hitting contrast ads. Be cute, be funny, smack him down hard.

Posted by Tim K | February 20, 2008 7:16 PM

Tim,

I think that Senator Clinton will no doubt win this debate as she has been very strong in this format. I think that her new line about joining the "Night Shift" is some very savvy framing. It pits her working class roots against his yuppie candidacy and by extension his latte-drinking supporters.

Do you know if this debate will be a stand up or sit down affair? If it is a stand up affair, I think that Senator Clinton should totally try to subtly physically over power him by engaging his space -- this could have the effect of rattling him and emphasize her gritty aggressive scrappiness. She needs to go on the attack and maybe even use her successful "more cattle" line.

I bet by Friday the tracking polls will show a clear national advantage for Senator Clinton.

Posted by Toobie | February 20, 2008 7:32 PM

Toobie, you're so unbelievably wrong, it boggles my mind. I guess you missed the memo -- Puerto Rico (not Pennsylvania) is the new new new firewall. Pass the word.

Posted by Jeff Larson | February 20, 2008 7:42 PM

Is Toobie for real? BTW, the MyDD delegate counter is horrendously outdated. It also includes "automatic delegates," a couple of which non-automatically abandoned Hillary today for Obama.

Posted by Elrod | February 20, 2008 7:59 PM

Those of you who sit there weeping at his pretty speeches will learn again at the next debate how unfit Obama is for the presidency. He gives rousing speeches from a teleprompter, but he can't think on his feet. Senator Clinton will wipe the floor with him and show him, again, to be an empty suit who doesn't know policy, doesn't know how to tackle the problems facing this country. I expect some hilarious gaffe that will send his poll numbers through the floor.

Posted by Toobie | February 20, 2008 9:16 PM

I wish that were true but I doubt there's going to be a gaffe that major between now and Ohio/Texas that the media will actually run with.

Posted by Tim K | February 20, 2008 9:49 PM

It truly is amazing that Obama is even giving Senator Clinton a run for her money. You have a wise and experienced senator who is ready from Day One and a guy who should be competing with Dennis Haysbert for the role of President on "24," and the flashy, slick actor is actually ahead, technically! It's the Reagan phenomenon all over again; quite a few voters will be duped by the showman. Amazingly, they tend to be the ones with the fancy college degrees this time around. At least that crowd didn't fall for Reagan, generally.

Posted by Toobie | February 20, 2008 10:33 PM

My predictions:

OH C (65) O (35)

RI C (60) O (40)

TX C (58) O (42)

VT C (52) O (48)

WY C (62) O (38)

MS C (55) O (45)

Penn C (68) O (32)

Posted by Jerome | February 20, 2008 11:40 PM

Mrs. Clinton said she could not begin to explain how the Texas [primary/caucus] system worked. "I had no idea how bizarre it is," she said aboard her plane flying from Wisconsin to Ohio. "We have grown men crying over it."

READY ON DAY ONE!

Posted by Jeff Larson | February 21, 2008 12:42 AM