7/16: If It Happened Once ...
If Barack Obama's stagnation in the polls are any indication, Hillary Clinton has managed to mitigate his early credibility on the war in Iraq (based on his pre-Senate opposition to the invasion), by demonstrating how consistent their records have been on the war since Obama joined the Senate. Those hard-core Howard Dean supporters who energized the party in '04 and '06 have been keeping score since Obama came to DC, and they're not impressed with his anti-war creds. If HRC can change her netroots image from Iraq-hawk to anti-war leader, who's to say a GOPer not forced to back Pres. Bush with votes in the House or Senate couldn't pull a similar trick among the general electorate?
All of the top-tier GOP WH '08ers have been equivocal on their support for Bush's surge at best. With John McCain now an also-ran, the new big three (Fred Thompson, Rudy Giuliani, and Mitt Romney) are free to shape their own Iraq statements unencumbered by cong. votes that force them to either stand with or distance themselves from Bush. With this flexibility, it's not impossible to picture the Dems' '08 advantage on Iraq squandered by HRC and her '02 vote for the war facing off against a GOPer highly critical of Bush's conduct in the war coupled with a newly energized GOP base. Stranger things have happened.
DEM FIELD: You're Both Right
Tracking the dispute between Dennis Kucinich and John Edwards over how many candidates should be allowed in upcoming Dem debates, Open Left's Chris Bowers is sympathetic to both parties: "No matter how it may end up being portrayed in the media, I think Edwards is right to try and seek new debate formats. The established format of having eight candidates on a stage at the same time providing 60-second answers, in random order, to questions that generally lack focus simply does not work for anyone. Voters do not learn much about candidates. Issues are not discussed in depth. There is no meaningful exchanges between candidates, and candidates themselves have little chance to offer more than sound-bite insight into their ideas for America. These formats are so awful, that even a political junkie like myself can't watch them. We need something better."
Bowers goes on to suggest MoveOn's issue based virtual townhalls would be more informative: "By giving each candidate 5-10 minutes of interrupted time to answer questions on a focus issue--first Iraq, and now global warming--Democratic primary voters can actually learn useful things about each candidate."
CLINTON: Must Change Campaign Song In Deliberative Manner
The Plank's Michael Crowley reports from a 7/16 Hillary Clinton rally in Manchester, NH:
It's true, as everyone says, that Bill overshadows Hillary. He's smoother and warmer and speaks in more natural cadences than his wife. ... At times even Bill seemed to tune out his wife. He would slouch down, elbows on his knees, and slip into a slackjawed daze -- only to snap out of it just in time for the end of an applause line, suddenly looking around with a wistful grin as if whatever it was he hadn't really heard was just marvelous and isn't she terrific? ... It also seemed that the audience craved more red meat on Iraq than it got. Hillary drew roars of approval when she declared that "we have got to bring our troops out of Iraq as soon as possible." But she then stressed that any Iraq exit must be conducted "responsibly and carefully" and "in a deliberative manner," and it was crickets chirping.
Crowley concludes: "P.S. Celine Dion is unbelievably more hideous when blasted over a loud PA system."
EDWARDS: Don't Mention The Haircut
Campaigning separately, John and Elizabeth Edwards stops in Reno, NV, and Anamosa, IA, this weekend. Reno and its DiscontentsMyrna Minx saw EE open the official campaign in office in Reno: "A man that can pick a woman like Elizabeth Edwards as a life partner demonstrates excellent judgment. What an asset she is to the Edwards' campaign."
Back in IA, MyDD's Nate Willems reports from Anamosa's Lawrence Community Center: "Senator Edwards spoke briefly about his new policy initiative on creating "Green Collar" jobs in America before moving to about 45 minutes of questions and answers. ... In talking to the Democrats in attendance, I think there are a lot of 2's (people leaning towards Edwards) with very few 1's (committed supporters). There are also a lot of people who are seriously looking at Edwards and Richardson or Edwards and Obama."
In other Edwards related blogging, Open Left's Matt Stoller takes NBC's Jim Miklaszewski to task for accepting $30k to give a speech for the Greater Providence Chamber of Commerce, "a speech in which he bashed Edwards for the haircut incident." Stoller tracks established criticism of journos on the lecture circuit, noting NBC's past policy banning such practices and concludes: "Did Miklaszewski break company policy by accepting this speaking fee? It certainly would seem he did ... Anyway, it seems worthwhile to figure out if this practice is a regular occurrence at NBC, and if they've reversed their policy. Is the pay-to-play once again explicit?"
OBAMA: That Is So 2002
Citing polling data showing that positive press surrounding Barack Obama's strong Q2 fundraising totals failed to turn into any gain on Hillary Clinton's frontrunner status, the netroots continue to blame Obama's stalled momentum on his failure to distinguish himself from HRC on Iraq. MyDD's Jerome Armstrong blogs:
Then Obama arrived in the Senate, and for 20 something votes straight, Obama never met an Iraq war-related or funding bill that he would vote against. Obama and Clinton's voting record of supporting funding of the War since then is identical. ... Obama wants to make a preemptive differentiation that only he is prepared to be the Democratic nominee based on his original opposition to invading Iraq. It's as if Obama is trying to become the Dean of '08 in attracting those of us who were against this war from the beginning. But the comparison of Obama to Dean ends in 2003. Dean never supported funding of the war, Obama continually did until the most recent vote. ... If Obama thinks he's going to move primary and caucus voters toward him by making a vote that happened 5 years earlier, given his strident support of funding the war, he's wrong.
Open Left's Matt Stoller voices similar thoughts. First citing poll numbers showing as many as 42% of Dems favored invading Iraq, Stoller writes: "Now, it's far less forgivable that Clinton didn't come out for withdrawal until 2007, and up until 2006 didn't want timetables. But Obama didn't make arguments about ending the war that differed substantially from Clinton's. So both Clinton and Obama fit well within the mainstream of Democratic opinion in 2002-2003 ... Anyway, I just think that it's important to understand why Obama's critique of Clinton on the war isn't working. Lots of Democrats made that stupid judgment call as well, as are willing to forgive a bad decision from five years ago. And Obama's had five years to distinguish himself on Iraq, and hasn't."
Not everyone is being critical of Obama however. AMERICAblog's John Aravosis likes his plan for taking US troops in Iraq and moving them to the Pakistan-Afghanistan border: "Smart move. Bush and the Republicans need to be hit repeatedly on this point. They let Osama slip away. They chose to invade Iraq, where Al Qaeda never was, rather than go after Al Qaeda itself. And now Al Qaeda is stronger. Of course it is, we've ignored them for 6 years - well, other than training them in Iraq."
OBAMA II: A More Experienced Lincoln
Matt Bai's New York Timespiece claiming "Obama ... would set a new precedent for inexperience in the White House" drew strong defenses of Obama's career. MyDD's Jonathan Singer blogs: "[That] statement is demonstrably false -- Abraham Lincoln served just two years in the United States House of Representatives, while Obama will have served four years in the United States Senate by the time the next President is inaugurated."
Matthew Yglesias also took issue: "If Obama is elected to the White House, he will have served eight years in the Illinois State Senate and four years in the United States Senate. In the twentieth century, I count Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Herbert Hoover, Jimmy Carter, and Ronald Reagan as all having served fewer than 12 years in public office before assuming the Presidency and I count exactly twelve for Warren Harding. To find a President with as few as six years of public office under his belt before becoming President, you need to go all the way back to . . . the current President of the United States so it's not like you need to be a historian to figure this out."
OBAMA III: The Future Of Political Discourse In Our Country
The Huffington Post was the first to post the "latest video from Team Obama Girl." In the current episode, Obama's buxom brunette supporter squares off in a pillow fight with the star of the "Giuliani Girl" video. HuffPo's Rachel Sklar reviews: "Solid outing from Team Obama Girl, and, it looks like, third time's a charm."
WEBB: Still Can Be The Face Of The Dem Party
Sen. James Webb's (D-VA) 7/15 Meet The Press showdown with Sen, Lindsey Graham (R-SC) on Iraq drew wide netroots praise. Open Left's Matt Stoller blogs: "This is great stuff. It's undeniable. Now, if Reid had made the Republicans filibuster the Webb amendment last week, Webb would have been the face of the Democratic Party. ... Wow."
Webb's forcefulness on the issue even soothed over those with past disagreements. Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat blogs: "I have been tough on Jim Webb due to his refusal to consider using the Spending Power to end the Iraq Debacle and I will continue to be, but one thing I always have believed is that Jim Webb, like Wes Clark, conveys confidence, even arrogance, when discussing national security issues that; something Democrats desperately need as a political matter. Webb does not cower to the nonsense spewed by Republicans with their talking points.
GIULIANI: Less Hating Abortion, More Loving The Constitution, Please
The Brody File makes the case that Rudy Giuliani's "Justice Advisory Committee" led by ex-US Sol. Gen. Ted Olson is his best bet for alleviating any worries social conservatives have about his candidacy: "If I'm Giuliani, I would continue to push judges in nearly every stump speech. When it comes to social issues, abortion isn't a winner for him. When he talks about how he hates abortion and the number of abortions dropped during his time as Mayor, that just doesn't quite do it for pro-lifers. Instead, start figuring out how you can convince voters that you'll be reliable on nominating strict constructionist judges. This strong committee is a start. It gives Giuliani some cover."
F. THOMPSON: Landing The Right Endorsements
The Brody File was deluged with email after posting Southern Baptist Pres. Richard Land's claim that, "It's Fred Thompson's race to lose." Reader responses include:
- "I am a Southern Baptist layman and deacon who is very involved in the SBC. Dr. Land is where I think most of us are right now, we can't come out and flat throw all our support to Thompson because although he stands morally with us he is not a faithful evangelical."
- "I agree with Dr. Richard Land on many things, but not on this one. Supporting a candidate because of popularity seems pretty silly."
- "When Christian "leaders" such as Dr. Land tell us six months before the primaries that it's Fred Thompson's race to lose, while also telling the MSM eight months before the primaries that our highly qualified Christian brother Mike Huckabee has no chance to win, it seems to me that Christians need to find new leaders."
- "[Y]ou can add my voice to the list of those who have taken the time to study the candidates and come to the conclusion that Fred Thompson is the man to back. His positions on a host of issues are very consistent with mine. I'd even say that in reference to nearly all national issues on which I've spoken, he's right there. The few points I've come across on which I might differ with him have been explained to my satisfaction, and then some."
IRAQ: Bring Out The Diapers
A growing chorus of netrooters want Sen. Maj. Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) to forcer GOPers to actually filibuster Dem Iraq legislation from the Senate floor. Open Left's Chris Bowers makes the case: "This is would be a welcome step and tactical change. No more simply allowing Republicans to defeat Democratic legislation just by holding a cloture vote. It is time to actually make Republicans carry out the filibusters they threaten when they vote "no" on cloture. ... Politically, there is no way we can lose by employing this tactic."
The Huffington Post's Miles Mogulescu is on the same page: "Sen. Reid: It's time to force the diminishing minority of Republican Senators who continue to support Pres. Bush's failed Iraq strategy to "go to the diaper", speak 'round the clock, bring cots and sleeping bags into the Senate chamber, as the American people watch them try to talk to death a vote on an Iraq redeployment bill that a majority of Americans support. ... I predict that the filibuster by these "courageous" Republican warriors will crumble and the Senate will join the House in sending a troop redeployment bill to Pres. Bush's desk."
But there is also growing concern that "toothless" measurers like the Levin-Reed amendment are diluting Dem strength on the issue. A Booman Tribune writer that GOP defections are helping to boost anti-war GOP credibility: "As ludicrous as it sounds, it is the Democrats who are getting the blame for not doing enough to get our troops out of Iraq, even though they have only had a few months and fewer opportunities to do so. And it is the republicans who are getting the small bit of glory for pressuring Bush to change course."
Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat also worries that Dems are creating too many "safe harbors" for anti-war GOPers to hide in, and pushes for a binary votes on Iraq spending for next spring: "offer the Republicans equitable treatment for the Warner-Lugar Amendment, the same as that given the Reid-Levin binding timelines Amendment. Either both face a cloture vote, or neither. Either both come to the floor for an up or down vote, or neither. Let up or down votes become the Dem mantra on this. Make the GOP create their own safe harbors."
Also, TPM Cafe's Greg Sargent takes Rep. Dan Boren to task for suggesting its the Dems who are moving the goalposts on Iraq.
IRAQ II: Blame Game
Sens. John Warner's (R-VA) and Richard Lugar's (R-IN) new proposal for Iraq was not well received by conservatives. Mark at RedState blogs: "it's not a way forward, but a trip backwards. The Senators introduced an amendment to the Defense Appropriation Bill that would require the president to seek a new Congressional authorization for continued military operation in Iraq. This was a bad idea when Sen. Hillary Clinton proposed a similar amendment, and it didn't get any better once a Republican's name was attached."
More from Mark: "For as much as Sens. Warner and Lugar don't want the United States to lose the War in Iraq, their Democratic colleagues don't want to be blamed for losing it. That is why they can't get the votes to simply cut off the funds for the war. Proposals like this one only give the Democrats cover to continue undermining the war effort with their show votes and political stunts."
IMPEACHMENT: To Impeach, Or Not To Impeach
Bill Moyers 7/13 show discussing impeachment with The Heritage Foundation's Bruce Fein and The Nation's John Nichols drew a fresh round of calls for Dems to begin hearings. David Sirota blogs at Working for Change: "For the last 6 years, we have watched the Bush administration commit illegal crimes from leaking information about Valerie Plame to having an illegal wiretapping program on American citizens. With a crippled system of checks and balances the president and vice president feel they are above the law. They must answer for their crimes and the solution is impeachment. If you haven't spoken out on this issue tell Congress right now to bring impeachment hearings for our two top executive leaders by clicking here. It is critical that we save our Constitution and finally hold our leaders accountable."
At Eschaton, Avedon adds: "It's just my opinion, but everyone in the country really should watch the video of John Nichols of The Nation and Bruce Fein of The Washington Times explaining to Bill Moyers why we should and must impeach them." The Left Coaster's Steve Soto is also on board: "After watching this show, it only reinforces my belief that contrary to Nancy Pelosi's thinking, impeachment shouldn't be off the table, but rather should be the one of the only courses served on the table."
Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat, however, throws water on the whole idea: "Why not instead of wasting time on an impeachment that will never happen, we instead apply ourselves to pressuring the Congress to use the power the Founders intended as the principal check on the Executive? Why not concentrate on reviving that check? Oh by the way, with the added benefit of actually STOPPING Bush's abuses and follies?"
THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Too Early To Tell
Pollster.com's Mark Blumenthal summarizes some findings on polling and cell phones from the annual conference of the American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) and concludes:
So what is the bottom line? Surveys via cell phone are feasible, but much more expensive than landline surveys and with some methodological kinks (like weighting) yet to be worked out. Supplemental cell-phone interviewing is going to be important for the multi-million-dollar government surveys that track health and health related behavior (including some measures that currently show statistically significant bias when the cell-phone only population is missed).
So what do we do about the cell-phone only problem? Those of us who obsessing over political polls need to keep a close eye on the special cell phone surveys conducted by the Pew Research Center and, perhaps, by others pollsters. These will provide invaluable clues as to whether the cell-phone-only problem is creating any sort of consistent errors in political surveys.
LEST WE FORGET: Singing The Blues
Conservative dissatisfaction with Pres. Bush has grown to the point country ditties dissing the texan are being posted at The Corner. John Derbyshire reworks the first few lines of Sammi Smith's and Kris Kristofferson's 'Help Me make it Through the Night' to bring us:
HELP ME GET BACK TO THE RIGHT Take the W from my car. Peel it off and let it fall. Leave the bumper clean and bright For this sticker from Ron Paul. It's not me that's changin' sides. It's more a case of seein' the light. I've supported Bush too long. Help me get back to the Right.
