-
sponsorship
Here’s an interesting bit from Matt Bai’s upcoming New York Times Magazine article (not online just yet) on how Bill Clinton’s legacy has shaped Democratic politics and the current presidential race. Over the past few weeks, Bill has been a bit more aggressive
than usual, most recently telling
Charlie Rose that electing Barack Obama would be like “rolling the dice” on America’s
future. Here’s one reason why:
As he doused his fries in ketchup, Clinton told me that he
was generally more inclined to want to ‘‘pop back’’ at Edwards or Obama than
his wife was, but he had to remind himself that Hillary was plenty capable of defending
herself. There have been reports in the last few weeks about Clinton’s lashing
out at strategists and meddling in his wife’s campaign; insiders say this has
been exaggerated, but some of Clinton’s friends and former advisers told me
that the attacks from rivals irritate Clinton a lot more now, when they are directed
at his wife, than they did when he was running. (‘‘As a candidate, he was
absolutely bulletproof — it never bothered him,’’ says Paul Begala, one of Clinton’s 1992 advisers.)
What he takes even more personally — and should, really — is the unmistakable
premise that underlies the sniping, that somehow his own presidency was bad for
the country and the party.
It's true: Every time Obama talks about a new generation of leaders or "moving on" or overturning "textbook" Democratic politics, Bill must feel it. That's why Clinton's best defense so far has been to say that he was a young upstart once, too: “I was, in terms of experience, was closer to Senator Obama, I
suppose, in 1988 when I came within a day of announcing,” he said in an interview in September. He said he chose not to run that year because “I really
didn’t think I knew enough, and had served enough and done enough to
run.”
In other words, Clinton was the party's great new hope, too -- but he was smart enough to wait. It sounds like he's defending Hillary. But really, he's defending himself.
-
sponsorship
It's poll-a-palooza out there today. Some highlights from the CNN/WMUR (Dems' PDF; GOP's PDF) poll in New Hampshire.
- Rudy Giuliani has stalled in New Hampshire and hasn't broken the 20-point barrier since early November. McCain, meanwhile, is gently on the rise in second place.
- In June 2007 the war in Iraq was the most important issue for 36 percent of voters. Now it's the most important issue for 13 percent. 31 percent of Democrats say Iraq is most important, tied with health care. Illegal immigration and homeland security are both more important than Iraq for Republicans.
- Granite State residents trust Giuliani and McCain to do the best job when dealing with terrorism, but Romney to best handle illegal immigration, taxes, and the economy. Romney is also most trusted on abortion.
- Romney's support is skewed towards college-educated, richer residents. McCain's towards high-school educated, poorer New Hampshire citizens.
- 22 percent of New Hampshire Republicans have definitely decided who to vote for. 31 percent of Democrats have decided.
- 60 percent of undeclared voters say they'll vote in the Democratic primary
If you're a poll junkie, visit Slate's Election Scorecard for your daily fix.
-
sponsorship
Forget Barack Obama's kindergarten ambitions. This is damning. From Newsweek's cover story on John Edwards:
Edwards has said that, even as a kid, he dreamed of being a lawyer. He
watched every episode of "Perry Mason" and "The Fugitive." When he was
11, he penned an essay titled "Why I Want to Be a Lawyer" ...
-
sponsorship
America has a tradition of waging wars on two fronts. First there were the European and Pacific fronts during WWII. In the '60s and '70s, the United States attacked communism overtly in Vietnam and covertly in Latin America. And these days, we're fighting the war on terrorism in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
Now the candidates are following suit. Democrats and Republicans have opened several two-front wars during the campaign. A breakdown of the most recent tactical gambles, and what they're risking:
Obama attacks Clinton and Edwards: A few days ago, Barack Obama started critiquing John Edwards' anti-lobby stance to compete for second-choice votes. Additionally, Obama and Clinton continue to butt heads over health care, electability, and experience.
Going after Clinton and Edwards at the same time may leave Obama open to claims that he is overly aggressive. He is essentially a front-runner in Iowa, and attacking Edwards could only embolden Biden, Richardson, and Dodd voters to flock toward the besieged underdog.
Clintonites attack Obama: Bill Clinton blasted Obama in an appearance on The Charlie Rose Show, Bill Shaheen rehashed Obama's drug use, and Bob Kerrey blew on the embers of those pesky Muslim rumors.
Hillary? She stays silent. On paper, this strategy seems to insulate her from any criticism, since her proxies are doing the work for her. But the Shaheen imbroglio showed how quickly scandals can jump the barrier and start affecting Hillary's image, as well.
Romney attacks Huckabee and Giuliani: Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani have been trading barbs since the early days of the campaign, at no cost to Romney in the early primary states. But since Mike Huckabee's ascendance, Romney has had to fight Huckabee in Iowa and Giuliani elsewhere, which has driven down his poll numbers in Iowa and kept him stagnant nationwide.
Romney's troubles are the most foreboding for Obama and Clinton. Romney has been forced to peddle two different messages to two different audiences—Iowans and Americans—while watching his Iowa numbers drop. Attacking a nice guy like Huckabee is very different than attacking a liberally conservative hawk like Giuliani. The more messages a campaign has to churn out, the more strained its resources are. Sometimes scattering your attention can leave an opening for another challenger. Just ask John Edwards, circa 2004, or John McCain, circa 2008.
-
sponsorship
Attention Washington, D.C., residents! The Ron Paul Blimp will be passing by the district between 3:30 and 4 p.m. today. It's hard to say where you'll be able to see it, though, since the blimp can't legally fly within 15 miles of the White House. From the blimpsters' press release:
We would like to assure the public that the blimp is not a threat to national security, only to other republican presidential candidates.
The blimp will be spending tonight in Harford, MD, just north of Baltimore, after which it will probably be heading up toward New York City, according to blimp spokesman Bryce Henderson. Donations to the blimp are currently around $260,000, which should be enough to keep the zeppelin aloft through Christmas. They've scuttled plans to visit the Iowa caucus—the blimp is "very sensitive to weather," Henderson says—so it will likely be heading south to Florida and Atlanta in the coming weeks.
You can track the blimp's whereabouts via GPS here.
-
sponsorship
Now that Mike Huckabee set
the tone with his Jesus-invoking, subliminal
cross-including Christmas ad, everyone else is climbing aboard.
Barack Obama’s holiday spot plants him and his family in
front of a roaring hearth and a giant Christmas tree. No Muslim prayer mats here! After a
few platitudes about family and friendship, Obama gives his daughters, Malia
and Sasha, a chance to say “Merry Christmas” and “Happy Holidays.” Like
Huckabee, Obama goes easy on the policy.
Rudy Giuliani, meanwhile, isn’t afraid of talking shop. In one
new spot, he sports a bright red
sweater vest and promises to give all Americans the “same gift: A safe America. Lower
taxes. Secure borders. Job growth. Fiscal discipline. Strict constructionist
judges.” Something tells me Giuliani really would enjoy coming downstairs to
find Antonin Scalia curled up under his tree.
A second ad has Giuliani wishing for all
those same things, and hoping that all the candidates could just get along. At which
point Santa, who was sitting there the whole time, interjects: “Ho, ho, ho, ho. I was with you right up until
that last one. Ho, ho, ho, ho, ho.” Santa endorsing the politics of personal destruction: this really is a special election.
UPDATE 11:28 a.m.: Now Huckabee is claiming the "floating cross," which looks like a window pane, was actually "a bookshelf." Or at least that's what he told Joe Scarborough. He added that "if you play the spot backwards, it says 'Paul is dead, Paul is dead.' "
UPDATE 1:46 p.m.: A reader points out, what's with the "Merry Christmas" AND "Happy Holidays"? Come on, Rudy. That's the kind of fence-sitting you'd expect from a Clinton holiday ad.
UPDATE 3:11 p.m.: John Edwards arrives fashionably late.
UPDATE 5:04 p.m.: Hillary's video: Like Rudy's, but classier.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?