August 06, 2007

8/6: The Question That Didn't Bark

Sometimes the best way to tell when a Dem WH '08 has made a real gaffe is to see which incidents the netroots don't address at all. With both the Pakistan and US administrations condemning Barack Obama's recent thoughts on using unilateral US force in Pakistan, one would think the issue might come up in the Yearly Kos presidential forum. And indeed, Pakistan did come up. But Obama conspicuously was not asked about it and chose not to offer an answer. The crowd at the forum was largely behind John Edwards anyway, and Hillary Clinton's refusal to disavow campaign funds from lobbyists ruled the headlines. But the Obama campaign better beware; in less hospitable forums than a blogger conventions, he will be pressed on the issue.

YEARLY KOS DEBATE: Holier Than Thou

John Edwards clearly won the crowd at 8/5's Yearly Kos Presidential Forum. Boisterous applause from Edwards answers on cleaning up DC knocked out the live online video feed three separate times. However, for those not watching the debate live or in person, the confrontation between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama over accepting campaign contributions from lobbyists dominated post-debate blogging. Talking Points Memo posted video of the exchange.

The preponderance of netroots opinion sided with Obama/Edwards critique of HRC:

• Taylor Marsh: "This line was mocked later in the evening and is going to come back at her: "A lot of those lobbyists, whether you like it or not, represent real Americans."
• a MyDD reader: "I see this as Hillary's first Gaffe of the primary. Are americans in Iowa and New Hampshire going to believe lobbyists work for them?"
• a Daily Kos reader: "Yikes, Clinton's lobbyist answer was ugly. Not willing to give up lobby $$$. Kos crowd, crickets."
• The Huffington Post's Daniel Brook: "A less hypocritical answer to the question might have looked something like this: "Yes, I am taking lobbyists' donations and I too am concerned about the disproportionate influence wealthy interest groups have on the political process. I have often had to compromise my beliefs for lobbyist cash and that troubles me as a Senator, as a citizen, as a human being. And that's why we desperately need to switch over to a public campaign finance system. But with the system we have, in order to win, I need to take their money."
• David Sirota: "This is about as revealing a moment as you will find on which candidates do - and do not - represent change. ... Clinton actually goes on record bragging that she will continue raking in massive campaign contributions from corporate lobbyists, and claiming that "lobbyists, whether you like it or not, represent real Americans." Oh really? How about, as just one example, Clinton's vote for the 2001 Bankruptcy Bill?

At first Matthew Yglesias was sympathetic to HRC's reasoning on the issue: "[S]he got the right answer, namely that lobbyists do their jobs because they get hired by people and Obama and Edwards take money from the executives and so forth who do the hiring, so the whole distinction is basically meaningless. As best I can tell, that's totally correct; refusing to take money from lobbyists is just a kind of meaningless grandstanding."

Given enough time rationalize past his original Obama-as-meaningless-grandstander reaction, Yglesias argues: "Worrying about whether or not contributions are corrupting people is rarely going to provide a definitive conclusion and doesn't necessarily tell you much about the merits of a proposal ... The issue is that we should probably assume the people giving the money have some basic level of competence. The health care industry has, over the years, become a major financial backer of Clinton's. It seems they feel that she doesn't pose a huge threat to their interests. ... we have to worry that they may be right."

Those with views closer to Yglesias' initial response on the exchange include:

• Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat: "Blasting lobbyists while taking money from state lobbyists and the spouses of lobbyists, as Obama does, or from certain principals like hedge fund managers, as Edwards does, is certainly disingenuous."
• a Daily Kos reader: "They all have to raise huge sums of money. But if I am offended by all the fine distinctions. 'I can raise money from state lobbyists, but you can't raise money from federal lobbyists.' Give me a break.
• a MyDD reader: "It is well known that Barrack's fundraisers have met with some of K Streets biggest players and asked them for their own personal fundraising contact list and solicited these lobbyists to get checks from their spouses and other family members because they were going to make "an issue" about "refusing" lobbyist contributions. If you think that Hillary is dirty here, whilst Obama and Edwards are clear....well, I think you ought to learn more about how the political system really works in this age.

CLINTON: A Mixed Bag

Non-lobbying related thoughts on HRC's performance include:

• MyDD's Todd Beeton: "First let me say that this was the first debate in which Clinton faltered. ... Not only were some of her answers uncharacteristically unfocused, but her evasion of the question about stopping the war by simply defunding it and her use of the Bush "we're safer but not safe enough" frame were real low points."
• a Daily Kos reader: "This is weird, but I'm having more respect for Clinton's thoughfulness and a little less respect for Edwards who seems to be playing to the emotions of the crowd."
• another Daily Kos reader: "I've been impressed by Clinton so far I'm still undecided. Previously, I've been undecided/leaning to Edwards; now I think I'm undecided/leaning to Edwards or Clinton."
• one last Kossack: "The more I see of Hillary, the more I am convinced she is POTUS material. I love Obama, I love Edwards but Hillary will be ready to hit the ground running, and with this nation in such dire straits, I am thinking that on the job training may not be a good idea. Obama and Edwards both excellent Veep choices."

EDWARDS: Crowd Pleaser

Supporters and non-supporters alike all recognized that Edwards was the clear crowd favorite:

• MyDD's Todd Beeton: "John Edwards made a fierce pitch to us that he is the candidate of the netroots, the 2008 Howard Dean (presumably without the whole losing thing) and he made some real headway toward that. He reminded us that Elizabeth is already one of us and soared with his call to take power away from those entrenched interests in DC that he's been fighting all his life."
• Matthew Yglesias: "Edwards is slaying with every answer. The interesting thing is that his answers aren't any different from what I've heard at previous debates. His style, however, seems to me to work much better with a live audience that's allowed to applaud. His emotiveness gets the crowd roaring, and he's really good at surfing on the applause."
• AMERICAblog's AJ Rossmiller: "Edwards just got an amazing response from the crowd when he spoke about cleaning up Washington. ... The crowd loved it. First real standing ovation of the day."
• a Daily Kos reader: "John Edwards clearly did the best. Look at Clinton and Obama's body language in that picture. They didn't want to be there. The corporate media at large wasn't there to prop them up."
• another Kossack: "Edwards keeps hitting the right notes... He's absolutely correct about Big Oil, Big Insurance, and Big Pharma aren't going to give up power voluntarily. I don't know if he's going to make headway in the primaries, but he's improving the debate every time he opens his mouth."

Another popular Daily Kos diarist argued that Obama's 8/2 speech on Pakistan made him largely indistinguishable from Clinton on foreign policy, and went on to announce that if the election were held to day, he would vote for Edwards: "Edwards has not had the same urge as the other top-tier candidates to project hawkishness in his statements on national security. Rather, he focuses more on the root causes that allow terrorists to gain footholds - a long-term view on solving the problem - rather than the short-term solution of what it will take to win the 'war on terror'."

OBAMA: Pakistan ... Never Heard Of It

Obama may not have elicited the same applause as Edwards, but his performance was still well received:

• MyDD's Todd Beeton: "Barack Obama continued to deftly hammer home his recent theme that he is the candidate of change and Hillary is more of the same, but I don't know that he moved the blogosphere in his direction in any significant way with his performance. The fact is he didn't need to."
• a Daily Kos reader: "Obama is, without a doubt, the most specific of the candidates. He just gave an excellent answer on what his white house would look like and what he would change to restore the constitution. Ethics, ethics, ethics is the floor from which our country would function."
• more from Daily Kos: "In my personal opinion, Obama really outdid himself this time, and seems to really have put the awkwardness of earlier debates behind him getting out the powerful, well-thought-out but straightforward answers I've been waiting to hear out of him. ... As a nervous Obama leaner this one answered a few of my reservations and got me closer."
• Taylor Marsh: "One thing I found very odd is that when a question on our relationship with Pakistan came up, Obama was left out of the responses. Considering his recent speech that was just odd. (So is this.) But he didn't try to jump in either. I didn't quite understand it."

GOP DEBATE: Holding A GOP Debate On A Sunday Morning Is Like Holding A Hotline Staff Meeting During Happy Hour

Rudy Giuliani may have made the best impression on conservatives that tuned in for 8/6's 7 AM CST debate, but Mitt Romney's canned line on Barack Obama: "I mean, he's gone from Jane Fonda to Dr. Strangelove in one week" was the highlight of the event. The Corner's Kathryn Jean Lopez confesses: "I overslept. Almost forgot about the Republican debate. Woke up to Iowans cheering Ron Paul. Hit snooze."

Those calling the debate for Giuliani include:

• AmSpec's Philip Klein: "Rudy Giuliani gave another strong performance. He was able to bat away the social issues question early, and offer strong answers on national security and economic issues. He did a great job of challenging the premise of the questions, attacking Democrats whenever he got the chance, offering a unique perspective on policy, and displaying quick wit."
• a Power Line forum comment promoted by John Hinderaker (who thought the debate was schedule for 7 PM CST): "Giuliani had the most memorable lines, was best at mixing his own experience into his answers, and was really sharp when picking apart the Democratic field. He is so incredibly quick on his feet in this setting."
• Townhall's Matt Lewis: "I've got to declare Rudy Giuliani the winner today. This is partly because he performed the best, and partly because the other candidates under-performed. ... Rudy has clearly thought-through the questions and answers to a greater degree than the other candidates."
• AmSpec's Jennifer Rubin: "Rudy did something interesting in this debate. He went after the questioner for the built in assumption that raising taxes will give more revenue for things like bridge building. Everyone remembers the Ron Paul moment from the earlier debate and this was not as dramatic but there is a common thread. I think after years of listening to liberal conventional wisdom in New York he is more attuned to hearing the built in fallacies in his critics' and opponents' reasoning and more likely to go after them for it."

NRO's Jim Geraghty also watched the debate, but called it for Romney: "Romney's line about Obama "going from Jane Fonda to Dr. Strangelove in the span of the week" will be the soundbite of the day. Romney knows how to land a punch, and he's clearly decided to lay off McCain or any other potential future ally."

Not watching the debate, but still calling it for Romney based on press releases, Townhall's Hugh Hewitt: "Compare these three releases, and you instantly see that Governor Romney is leading with the strongest set of authorities and quotes when it comes to post-debate analysis, but that Mayor Giuliani is not far behind. ... Senator Strangelove Obama will get the most play across all media, and that's a big plus."

Other debate nuggets include:

• AmSpec's Philip Klein: "I wish there were a way to write this post more diplomatically, but the truth is, I thought Mitt Romney looked like a total buffoon when he was talking about his changing positions on abortion, so I may as well come out and say it. I don't know how I can be expected to take a candidate seriously who says, regarding his past abortion views: "I never said I was pro-choice, but my position was effectively pro choice." What on earth is that supposed to mean? It's hard to think of a statement about abortion that would be any more Kerry-esque."
• The Corner's K-Lo: "I don't know that people believe that he was "deeply opposed" to abortion prior to running in Massachusetts, even if they believe that he might be now. ... I think he'd be better off saying he simply didn't fully understand his political responsibilities to protecting the unborn and fighting for a culture of life prior to being in office as governor. He was wrong and missed some real opportunities and he's determined to make up for lost time."
• also from K-Lo: "Whenever Brownback and Huckabee speak now I am distracted by this Evangelical vs. Catholic sideshow."

GOP FIELD: Still A Better Response Rate Than Polling By Phone

Right Wing News polled 230 right-of-center bloggers and the 59 respondents ranked their 'most' and 'least' desired nominees for '08. The top five faves were: 1) Fred Thompson; 2) Rudy Giuliani; 3) Duncan Hunter; 4) Mitt Romney; 5) Mike Huckabee.

The least favorites: 1) Ron Paul; 2) John McCain; 3) Sam Brownback; 4) Tommy Thompson; 5) Tom Tancredo.

BROWNBACK: The Slimy Yellowbrick Road

Race 4 '08s Jason Bonham links to a Cyclone Conservative post detailing "very misleading phone call"s Sam Brownback's campaign are making. The calls are directed to Bob Vander Plaat supporters and ask them to support Brownback in the Ames Straw Poll, but forget to mention that Vander Plaat is Mike Huckabee's IA state chair. Bonham comments: "Sam, can you please stop all the frontal and backhanded attacks? Other than your supporters, no one likes it. ... From one Conservative GOP'er to another, Sam, clean up the filth in your campaign. Start running a decent and honest fight you promised."

GINGRICH: Newt No Like George

The Corner's Andy McCarthy counters the Atlanta Journal-Constitution's interpretation of Newt Gignrich's "phony war on terror" comments: "If you read what he actually said, however, Newt said that the war is entirely real. What is "phony," he argued, is the administration's approach to the war - including the reluctance to come to terms with the facts that radical Islam is the enemy, that you can't win it in a single theater (like Iraq), and that any serious approach would require real thought about energy independence."

HUCKABEE: For 7-Year Old Tax Experts

The IA Voice sat down for an interview with Mike Huckabee, including this Huckabee explanation on his support for the Fair Tax: "Yeah, the simplest way to describe it is that it takes all of the taxes of productivity and exchanges it for a very simple tax on consumption. It replaces the impossible to understand current tax code with a tax structure so simple that a 7-year old running a lemonade stand could understand it."

ROMNEY: Don't Get Angry Now

Townhall's Dean Barnett posts video of Mitt Romney taking on IA radio personality Jan Mickelson and summarizes: "Mickelson's station, WHO, had a video recorder on the governor that was recording his off-air comments, something that Romney was unaware of. On the air, Mickelson stated that according to Mormon theology, Romney should have been excommunicated from the Mormon Church because he was once pro-choice. Off the air, Romney tried to gently tell Mickelson that he didn't know what he was talking about."

Barnett later comments: "Dirty pool aside, I don't think Romney has looked better at any time during the campaign. Firm, decisive, authoritative - that's the guy I know. ... it was wonderful to see Romney making such a strong case for his candidacy and the proper role of religion in the campaign."

The Brody File tracks the story and comments: "I've always wondered how Mitt Romney would hold up under the pressure of being constantly asked about his faith. Since he' running for secular office, he figures he doesn't need to talk about his Mormonism. ... He's going to need to manage his emotions on this one or it could become a real problem for him."

F. THOMPSON: On Jeri And Cleavage

The Corner's Kathryn Jean Lopez captures conservative sentiment on the Washington Post's 8/5 story on Jeri Thompson: "Of what front-page news value is a piece exploring a potential presidential candidate's wife, including a profile-within-a-profile of one of her ex-boyfriends? If it belongs anywhere, it belongs in the Style section with Hillary's cleavage."

YEARLY KOS: Remember The Good Ole Days?

The atmosphere at Yearly Kos '07 definitely differed from '08. Those noticing include:

• TAPPED's Garance Franke-Ruta: "The first Yearly Kos conference in Las Vegas had two basic story lines. For conference participants, it was, "Wow! So that's what you look like in person!" And for the press it was some mix of "Geez, these people are so much more normal than I expected!" and "Huh, maybe they are a little quirky after all." ... this conference does not feel as grassroots or exciting as last year's. It feels like a cross between the annual Institute for Politics, Democracy, and the Internet conference in Washington, a Bloggingheads.tv marathon viewing session."
• TeddySanFran at firedoglake: "I want the revolutionary, angry, Establishment-challenging, rabble-rousing netroots back. If Netroots Nation sees its new mission as pleasing Traditional Media, or allying with it, or making nice, or merging the two into some amalgam that pleases anyone in the Establishment: then it's not my Netroots Nation. I'll just sit over here on the Left Coast and take well-deserved potshots at people who insult our Constitution, insult journalism, and insult the First Amendment. I'm sure they'll enjoy the cocktail weenies while I do."
• Siun at firedoglake: "With YKOS 2 over, I find myself trying to understand what I've just seen and why I found the experience so disheartening. While I love having time with so many wonderful firepups and FDL colleagues, the acceptance of conventional wisdom frames that seemed so pervasive was maddening. But the meaningless talking points seemed to be all most of the candidates would offer and the challenging netroots-y questions I think we wanted raised were never asked. Questions like: 'What were you thinking Sen. Obama when you spoke of a unilateral attack on Pakistan?'"

Highlights of DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas keynote address include:

I'm given a great deal of credit for our movement's success. But let's be brutally honest - what I've done is... build a website. ... While we were once lonely voices on the outside, people on the inside have discovered that we're not so scary after all, that they don't need to fear us. We'll get our hands dirty. We'll deliver results. And they've learned that, quite frankly, We tend to have a habit of actually being right about things. I had no idea that our country was full of natural leaders, all looking for a way to get involved. I simply built a website. It was you who built the netroots. And together all of us will build a true progressive America.

Finally, Open Left's Chris Bowers takes on PoliticoBen Smith 's claims that the netroots have lost influence in the primary process since '04: "Obviously, I think he is wrong about the blogopshere losing relative power and influence. Last time I checked, one the reasons the blogosphere got behidn Howard Dean was becuase he opposed the war in Iraq and favored universal health care, something few other Demcorats were willing to do at the time. Now, I'm sitting in a room where several presidential candidates, including all of the leading candidates, are directly telling bloggers that they agree with both positions. Yeah, we have really backslid in terms of power.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: We Might Be Here For Awhile

Open Left's Chris Bowers posts Pollster.com graphs, one on trends in '03-'04 Dem primary polls and another on how closely people pay attention to campaigns and comments:

The key point here is how these charts match up. Specifically, the rapid change at the end of the 2004 Democratic primary campaign occurred at the same moment when people began to pay far more attention to the campaign. ... The point here is this: don't expect any long-term, gradual improvement for any candidate. National changes in campaigns like this will happen only in large chunks, and as the result of major events. Otherwise, expect the campaign to stay pretty much as it is, and pretty much the way it has been for the past four months, until such an event takes place. ... Basically, unless something major happens, the horserace isn't going anywhere for a while.

LEST WE FORGET: Chappelle '08

RCP Blog's Reid Wilson is watching tourists on Capitol Hill:

Comedian Dave Chappelle made an appearance in the Longworth House Office Building early this afternoon. Dressed in a suit this reporter could only envy, Chappelle's entourage was stopped in the basement, near the cafeteria, as hordes of admiring fans snapped pictures and signed autographs.
One family of tourists walked by, eyed the throng and stepped into an elevator with a few staffers and one scribe too late to an interview to stop. "Who was that?" mother tourist inquired. "That was Barack Obama," said father tourist.

Posted by Conn Carroll at August 6, 2007 12:48 PM