August 09, 2007

8/9: A Tale Of Two Fields

So far the GOP and Dem fields have proved to be polar opposites horse race wise. On the Dem side, polling has been steady after Barack Obama's initial media swooning. If anything, Hillary Clinton has slowly built on her lead while the rest of the field has mainly been flat. Also unlike the GOP field, a clear story line has developed among the main contenders. Obama and John Edwards are both competing to be an agent of 'change', while Clinton is selling her 'experience' and hoping a change from Pres. Bush to a Dem WH is change enough.

For the GOP, polling over the last few months been chaotic with John McCain imploding, Rudy Giuliani holding steady, Mitt Romney slowly rising in early states, and Fred Thompson surging late. However, no real story lines have emerged from the field that capture how GOPers will choose between their candidates. They all have their problems, but what are the real distinctions between, say, Giuliani and Romney? Now that Giuliani is contesting IA, that may change. His backward slap at the rest of the field (saying he'd vote for McCain if he was not running) seems to have inspired Romney to hit back on immigration. But what is the overall theme this attack fits into. The GOP race is still under-defined.

One party seems to be deciding what direction their party should go for the next 8 years and the other seems to be deciding who will be the least annoying for the next 18 months.

GOP FIELD: No Surprises

The Corner's John Hood chides those who are surprised by SC's move to stay ahead of FL's 2/5 primary date: "It's been obvious for months that South Carolina was not going to let Florida leap-frog its first-in-the-South primary. It's also been obvious that South Carolina's decision would have a carom-effect on New Hampshire and possibly Iowa. The campaigns have all known about this, and if they don't have plans to adjust strategy and spending to earlier dates, including December ones, they're incompetent. The exact dates may not have been known, but everyone has had the general idea for a while."

Also at The Corner, Kathryn Jean Lopez speculates that the move hurts Mitt Romney by down playing IA's importance and links to this old NRarticle :

let's review what the Iowa Racket has accomplished for the GOP: It has led to the bizarre proliferation of political novices in the presidential field. It has all but shut down the chances of conservative statesmen to climb the electoral ladder. It has heightened the importance of early money, making it even more difficult for a good candidate to introduce himself. It produces victors who can't win. So why do we keep going back for more?

GIULIANI: Gut Check

NRO's Jim Geraghty wrapped up his email straw poll on how a Rudy Giuliani campaign would effect the number of social conservative GOP volunteers: "[T]his is truly a gut-level issue for a lot of folks, and a lot of readers can justify their stands with passion, eloquence, and compelling arguments.These numbers suggest that while far from all pro-life grassroots Republicans would stay home for Rudy, it's a large enough chunk to concern his campaign and the party as a whole."

MCCAIN: Buddies For Life

Power Line's Paul Mirengoff posted two glowing John McCain posts 8/8, both saying the GOP has "no better friend" than McCain: one post was on property rights; the other on Iraq.

On property rights (the original purpose for the interview) Mirengoff blogs: "John McCain has done a service to the conservative cause by injecting the issue of private property rights into the presidential campaign. McCain's starting point was the Kelo decision ... McCain called this decision "disastrous" and contrary to our Constitution and our system. He found it more in line with the teachings of Karl Marx."

On Iraq: "I asked the Senator whether he agrees with Bill Kristol and others that the political tide is turning here in Washington with respect to Iraq. McCain answered that he doesn't have a clear sense of this one way or another, but he's certain that the military tide has turned in Iraq. He quickly added, however, that this doesn't mean we're looking at 'a day at the beach.'"

ROMNEY: Winnebago's For Peace

Rachel Griffiths, the women who asked Mitt Romney if any of his sons planned to enlist the military, is a Daily Kos diarist and posted her version of the event before the AP first filed their story. The netroots widely linked to the story and Atrios honored Romney with his 'Wanker of the Day' award.

Reaction among conservatives was mixed. Romney defenders included:

• Townhall's Hugh Hewitt: "The Romney campaign quickly released the YouTube video of the exchange, though given the fundamental inability of the chickenhawk meme to move the average American voter, and the widespread rejection of such logic by the uniformed military, it might have been better to let the "controversy" play out a bit as a way of demonstrating how in the bag the AP is to the anti-war fringe."
• Race4'08s Jason Bonham: "If offering help for a political cause is not supporting your nation, than what is supporting your nation? Only paying taxes and fighting in the army?"
• Right Wing News: "Now, I will grant you that working to get your father elected to political office isn't exactly all that high up on my list of ways to show "support for our nation," but I don't think trying to get a candidate you believe in elected rates a zero on the patriotic "support for our nation" scale either."

Most conservatives, both Romney haters and sympathizers, thought Romney at least missteped:

• Liz Mair at Romney-hate-HQ-Andrew Sullivan: "I entirely agree with the sentiments voiced that Romney's sons campaigning for him is not the same as Iraq-- and that him suggesting it is, is just plain stupid. It takes a certain arrogance to view your candidacy as as important a national struggle as winning an actual war."
• Hot Air's Allahpundit: "Oof. Either this came out wrong or he was caught surprisingly flat-footed by the question; as stated, it sounds awful. For the record, the answer to this question always is, 'Not everyone was born with the courage and commitment to service displayed by the many thousands of left-wing bloggers who enlisted to fight in Afghanistan after 9/11.'"
• Outside the Beltway's James Joyner: "Mitt Romney has given what may be the dumbest answer ever by a presidential candidate. Now, I fully agree with Romney that we have an all-volunteer force and that his sons have every right to decide Army life isn't for them. But, sheesh, let's not pretend campaigning for dad's political ambitions is somehow equivalent to going to war."
• NRO's Jim Geraghty: "The first part of the answer strikes me as fine - we've got a volunteer army ... While participating in our democratic elections process by volunteering for a campaign is often a good thing, I don't think it ought to be compared to military service... Seems like comparing apples and oranges, to me."

ROMNEY II: Mano E Mano

Conservatives are taking Mitt Romney's attack on Rudy Giuliani over immigration as a sign the field has narrowed down to a two person race. AmSpec Blog's Philip Klein blogs: "Beyond the actual underlying issue, what this says to me is that the GOP candidates are starting to take their gloves off. Perhaps with McCain's chances dimmed and Thompson still undeclared, Romney now has Rudy in his crosshairs. And as far as I can tell this is the first time the Giuliani campaign has really gotten into the mix with a sharp retort.

Townhall's Matt Lewis speculates on the cause in the change of gears: "This seems to be the first time that GOP frontrunners have really gone after each other. Sure there have been dust-ups from second-tier candidates (such as Brownback's attacks on Romney). But in Sunday's debate, Romney had a golden opportunity to go after Rudy on the abortion issue -- and he declined to do so. The only thing that may have changed since then is that Rudy did say he would support McCain (if he, himself, were not running)."

F. THOMPSON: The Summer Of The Sequel Continues

Captain's Quarters thinks Fred Thompson's new 'committee manager' William Lacy is a great fit for the campaign: "Lacy looks like a better fit, in more ways than one. First, Lacy knows Thompson, having run his Senatorial campaign in 1994. He helped Thompson win his one re-election battle in Tennessee, a very successful victory during the Republican revolution that captured Congress. His networking ability and record of success will undoubtedly bring other veterans into the Thompson campaign as well. ... Better yet, Lacy provides Fred with a link to the Reagan administration."

NRO's Jim Geraghty posts a /29 op-ed by Lacy on Thompson's campaign including: "He has no national campaign experience and hasn't been through that large-scale rough and tumble. But he has been tested: In the darkest hours of his political career, when the wheels were about to come off his first campaign, he figured out how to scoop them up, put them on a red truck and drive off into the sunset. ... It was classic Hollywood - a happy ending. I hear they are planning a sequel."

Also, The Brody File posts a memo from ex-TN GOP chair Randle Richardson to Thompson and Lacy explaining that then-TN Christian Coalition pres. John Hanna had "serious concerns about [Thompson's] candidacy.

DEM FIELD: No Fake Seats For Richardson

Blue Hampshire's Mike Claulfield continues his Policy Straw poll, this time asking WH '08ers to distinguish themselves on labor policy:

• From Biden: I am the only candidate to vote for the minimum wage increase that was enacted this fall as part of the Supplemental bill that every other candidate voted against or said they would have.
• From Edwards: I am the only candidate who has participated in over 200 activities during the last three years to support workers across the country.
• From Obama: I am the only candidate whose policies have been shaped by firsthand experience working with communities in Chicago devastated by plant closings and the loss of industrial jobs.
• From Dodd: I am the only candidate who scored 100% on the 2006 AFL-CIO Congressional report card, and I've stood with unions for 32 years.
• From Hillary: Hillary Clinton supports strong environmental and labor standards in trade agreements so that American workers can compete on a level playing field.
• From Kucinich: I am the only candidate who can answer this question without being forced to answer a follow up question for you to know my position on issues that affect the working people in America.
• From Richardson: I am the only candidate for president who has advocated giving organized labor a real seat at the table: when I'm President, I will appoint a union member as my Secretary of Labor.

CLINTON VS OBAMA: 'Anybody But Clinton' Is His Only 'Hope'

Pollster.com/Wisc. Univ. prof. Charles Franklin analyses the claims made by dueling Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama memos and concludes:

Obama enjoyed a nice rise in the polls after he became a candidate following the 2006 election. ... But perhaps he was a "one-hit-wonder" because since April 1 there has been no further upward movement in his national support. If anything there has been a negligible decline to a current estimated support of 22.6%. ... My best estimate of Clinton's current support is 38.8%, a rise of nearly 4 points since the end of April. That four point rise won't sound like much to those accustomed to the noisy variation from poll to poll, but the trend estimator I use has the advantage of aggregating across many polls and hence has a much smaller range of random variability. A move of this much is certainly not negligible.

On the other hand, the Obama memo is quite correct that nomination races are about performance in individual states, not national polls. ... The available state polling substantially agrees with the national polling in putting Clinton ahead of Obama in all five of the first states ... Moreover, Clinton's support is stable or rising in all five states, while Obama has risen substantially in only South Carolina, and perhaps a bit in New Hampshire. In Iowa Obama's support has clearly fallen off, while Nevada and Florida appear essentially flat.

The bright side for Obama is that he still has a considerable upside in public awareness and in favorability, an area where Clinton does indeed seem in some peril among the general electorate. ... The critical question is what happens to the roughly 60% of Democratic voters who currently do not support Clinton. Can they be won over or can Obama (or someone else) become the focus of an "anybody but Clinton" coalition?

Reacting to news that SC may move their primary date up, Open Left's Chris Bowers speculates on what the final primary schedule will look like for Dems (IA 1/4; NH 1/12; NV 1/19; FL and SC 1/29) and concludes: "This is a calendar that greatly enhances the importance of Nevada for Democrats (good for Richardson and Clinton, even for Edwards, bad for Obama)."

CLINTON: Old Fogies Against The Whippersnappers

DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas looks at Rasmussen data showing Dems don't believe Hillary Clinton's statement that "lobbyists represent real Americans" but do trust that HRC has not been influenced by lobbyists. Kos comments: "Running against lobbyists -- essentially running against business-as-usual in DC -- is a winner, though Hillary is given more of a benefit of the doubt by both the general public and the Democratic electorate. ... it's clear that Obama and Edwards have seized on the lobbyist defense and will make it a centerpiece of their campaigns moving forward ... And thus two narratives are born -- for the DC-centric candidates (Hillary, Dodd, and Biden) it's 'experience', while for the outsiders (Obama and Edwards) it's 'change'. The negative narratives are, respectively, 'business as usual' and 'inexperience'."

Also looking at Rasmussen data, MyDD's Todd Beeton notes that while Dems have a generic advantage over GOPers on most issues, their specific candidates do not. Clinton, however, does the best: "Notice that Hillary Clinton wins most trusted on all but one issue among all respondents, due in part to the fact that a. she is more popular among Democrats than Rudy Giuliani is among Republicans and b. respondents spread their choices among 4 Republicans and just 3 Democrats. It also reflects the widely held view among her supporters that Hillary Clinton is competent and a problem solver

Open Left's Chris Bowers looks at the latest IA polling and tries to revive his inflated Clinton poll theory: "I am struck by how similar the "least likely" caucus goers in Iowa seem to break along roughly the same lines as national polls. Would anyone bat an eyelash at a national poll showing Clinton 33%, Obama 25%, Edwards 10%, and Richardson 6%? Even though Clinton's number has been higher lately, the similarity is interesting, and might imply that once the campaign heats up post-Iowa, there could be as much flexibility in national numbers as there was in 2004."

Finally, Atrios likes Clinton's mortgages plan, Markos links to Daily Show criticism of HRC on lobbyists, and The Huffington Post's Sara Whitman says she can't for Hillary due to her pandering on GLBT issues.

EDWARDS: We're Getting Dangerously Close To The McCain Zone Here

TAPPED's Tom Schaller thinks John Edwards "did just fine" in the AFL-CIO, but that "Edwards needs to be crushing Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama among these voters." Schaller concludes that Edwards is in big trouble: "It's almost Labor Day, and Edwards is slipping in the national polls. He's also now lost the huge Iowa lead he had spent the past two years building up. ... Edwards is not going to win the nomination. That could be a shame for Democrats, too, because he'd be a very hard candidate for the GOP to deal with in 2008."

OBAMA: Going To The Mat For Unilateral Action In Pakistan

TPM Cafe's Greg Sargent reports the Barack Obama campaign is sending a vide to supporters highlighting his differences from other WH '08ers on unilateral action in Pakistan. Sargent comments: "That the Obama camp is pushing this vid is another sign that Obama is really shoving all his chips onto this effort to run against the D.C. foreign policy establishment, something which (Obama suggests) includes Hillary and is responsible for engineering our failed foreign policy status quo. It's almost as if Obama is arguing that his willingness to stand up to this establishment is a sign of toughness: They won't push me around. And maybe it is."

Beyond the optics of the Pakistan issue, netroots reaction to the underlying issue remains mixed. Jimmy Carter aide Amitai Etzioni blogs at The Huffington Post: "When Barack Obama was criticized as dovish because he declared himself willing to sit down with the enemies of the state, he responded by turning suddenly hawkish -- calling for U.S. military strikes within Pakistan. ... That is the way Bush was egged on early in his term to seem tough by beating up on Saddam's Iraq. ... I stand with Senator Obama in favoring in principle the extension of this key idea beyond our borders, both in working with our allies and in trying to bring our adversaries into at least some kind of dialogue. It is hence quite disconcerting when he suddenly flashes some claws, especially since they are such a sudden and unbecoming acquisition. Such out of character toughness makes him seem like an opportunistic hack."

With an opposite reaction at The Huffington Post, Cenk Uygur both absolves Obama of any blame for the current rioting in Pakistan that followed Obama's comments, and then makes the case that if Osama bin Laden is captured soon, the credit should go to Obama for stepping up the pressure on Pervez Musharraf.

Finally, TPM posts video from Obama's Yearly Kos breakout session.

BLOGGERS VS BLOGGERS: Not That There's Anything Wrong With That

Matt Drudge linked to news that MyDD founder and 'Crashing The Gates' co-author Jerome Armstrong settled an SEC complaint against him for $30K. Armstrong consented to the judgment without admitting or denying any of the SEC's allegations, except as to jurisdiction.

Conservatives were not forgiving in their reaction to the news and the netroots were unrepentant. One Daily Kos diarist responded to Drudge's item with the header: "Closeted Homosexual Matt Drudge slams DailyKos." The diarist goes on: "Famous self-hating closeted homosexual and right wing propagandist blogger Matt Drudge has taken aim at the DailyKos community today."

BLOGGERS VS BELTWAY: Is Our Dems Learning?

Dem acquiescence to Pres. Bush's FISA reform legislation still has the netroots ruminating on the overall success of their movement. Open Left's Matt Stoller takes an optimistic view comparing "the nadir of the Democratic Party's history, the October 2002 war vote" to the FISA vote, and finds "a significant shift from earlier Congressional caucuses" in the progressive direction. Bowers concludes: "Today, not only has the party's base grown, intensified and increased its participation, but the party elites have moved much further to the left to go along with that shift than I had realized, rebuffing and embarrassing Democratic leaders on trade, telecom, energy, and the war in Iraq."

More alarmist than Stoller, The Left Coaster's Steve Soto worries that the FISA vote is a preview for 9/07 votes on Iraq: "And if you think that this won't be repeated again when Petraeus issues his report in September, think again. ... White House knows that the Blue Dog Democrats, some of who were elected last year with netroots support, will wet their pants when threatened with the bloody shirt and do whatever Bush wants them to do on the war."

Also taking on the Blue Dogs in the party who voted for FISA, ex-Rep. Major Owens (D-NY) links the Blue Dog's who voted for the FISA reform with Michael Vick's alleged dog torture at The Huffington Post: "We should contact Appropriations Chairman Senator Byrd who in tears raged against Michael Vick for his treatment of dogs. ...We should also beg that pundits and commentators please be equal opportunity critics and split their indignation between Michael Vick and the Blue Dog ringmasters.

Finally, set your Tivo's, DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas will be taking on DLC chair Harold Ford on Meet the Press 8/11.

IRAQ: A Mixed Bag

Conservative bloggers played up Gen. David Petraeus' appearance on Alan Colmes radio show 8/7, challenging their opponents to continue 'slander'ing the General. Robert Bluey explains:

Liberal blogger Glenn Greenwald made a mountain out of a molehill last month when he accused the U.S. military of granting an "exclusive" interview with Army Gen. David Petraeus to conservative talker Hugh Hewitt. Greenwald wrote to Petraeus' public affairs officer, requesting to have the general on the Alan Colmes Show, where Greenwald is a contributor. Of course, you wouldn't know anything about Petraeus' appearance from reading Greenwald's blog today. There's no mention of the fact that Petraeus spent 30 minutes talking to a liberal - the same liberal, in fact, whose show Greenwald requested him to appear on as a guest. Go figure.

Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat posts a partial transcript including this exchange:

• COLMES: The surge strategy has been referred to by some as the Petraeus Doctrine and when you and Ambassador Ryan Crocker report to Congress on September 15, it would be unlikely for you to report that your own strategy isn't working, right?


• PETRAEUS: Well, I have vowed that I will provide a forthright and comprehensive assessment and I'm not going to pull punches, and I have all along, frankly, reported setbacks as well as successes and we intend to do that when we go back and it will not be an unblemished report. ... The interim benchmark report was not an unblemished report. It's more of a mixed bag.

Finally, Matthew Yglesias links to a Center for American Progress compilation of "various Friedman Unit-esque pronouncements" on Iraq.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: No

The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum links to Washington Postreporting on a NAEP study showing more high schoolers demonstrated proficiency in economics than reading or math. Drum comments: "Question: how can you be "proficient" in economics if you aren't also proficient in reading and math? Does that make any sense?"

LEST WE FORGET: Bald Android Assistant's Love National Review

The Corner links to Magnificent Bastard's Top 10 Ways To Look Like A Total Tool Bag, including:

• 8. bluetooth headset - 1. Trust us, you're not that important; 2. You're now just one-degree removed from Lando Calrissian's bald android assistant.
• 5. national review magazine - In close association with bad style, bad politics.
• 1. crocs - Here's a good rule to live by: Never wear the same shoes as your 5-year-old nephew.

Posted by Conn Carroll at August 9, 2007 12:52 PM