November 09, 2007

11/9: Why Aren't They All (Or At Least The Better Funded Ones) Doing This?

Following the initial hits and then push back from the Hillary Clinton/no tip story, we are amazed that more campaigns do not have dedicated war room destinations like Team Clinton does. Now, we don't necessarily see a need for both Hillary Hub and The Fact Hub, but if you have the resources of say ... Barack Obama ... why not have a designated online destination for your online supporters to go for campaign approved instantaneous rebuttal to unflattering MSM stories?

DEM FIELD: Advantage Edwards

Responding to Hillary Clinton's announced vote for the Peru Free Trade Agreement David Sirota blogged: "Hold on to your hats, folks - this presidential race is about to get interesting." However, as Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat approvingly notes, Barack Obama has also announced his support for the deal: "I agree with Barack Obama on this issue. Anti-NAFTA rallying cries have been fun for some, but have little to do with where the bulk of non-petroleum US imports have come from -- China, Japan, South Korea and India. In essence, just as anti-immigration fervor reveals the ugly side of Know Nothing populism, blind opposition to free trade does as well."

Also linking trade and immigration (but siding with Sirota and not BTD), Open Left's Matt Stoller writes: "With the most recent election returns, it's clear that immigration isn't a Democratic killer. Both Progressive States new memo and Harold Meyerson point out that it's the economic anxiety caused by free trade agreements that causes the immigration backlash. ... Simon Rosenberg has been pushing on the other side of the immigration argument, making the push for Democrats to solidify the Hispanic vote. And that's smart, but such a strategy requires the coherence of going against corporate written trade agreements."

DEM FIELD II: You're Either With Bill Or Your With Hillary

Open Left's Chris Bowers links to AP reports of John Edwards distinguishing his Iraq position from Hillary Clinton on the grounds that the troops he would leave behind for counter terrorism missions would be based in Kuwait and not Iraq and responds: "I think he is correct to assert that there is a big difference as to where the troops are based. Personally, I think it is a bad idea to continue to conduct these missions in Iraq at all, since they serve as a key terrorist recruiting tool."

Bowers continues: "And it is kind of irritating that Obama remains so enigmatic on this subject. It would be much easier for both Edwards and Obama to successfully attack Clinton on this subject if they held Bill Richardson's position on Iraq."

CLINTON: She Did Survive

TAPPED hosted a debate on Hillary Clinton's electability claims 11/8. Tom Schaller started things off: "Why are Edwards and Obama not challenging Hillary on this claim? Has she, in fact, proved she knows how to beat the Republicans? ... She surely has a lot of experience fighting them, but that does not mean she knows how to beat them? ... Bill Clinton fought the Republicans but the GOP was stronger, not weaker, when they left office in 2001 than the Republicans were when the Clintons arrived in 1993.

Dana Goldstein responded: "While I think there's a lot to be said for this argument as historical interpretation, I don't believe it's a winning campaign strategy. "Progressive institution-building" has become a major concern for liberal funders, journalists, and politicos, but the average Democratic primary voter simply isn't thinking about it."

Ezra Klein then sided with Schaller: "Clinton's presidency abetted the rise (and, to be sure, fall) of Newt Gingrich, saw the Democrats lose the Congress for the first time in 40 years, failed to produce a successor, and ended with the ascendance of George W. Bush, Tom DeLay, and so forth. ... In other words, the Clintons didn't beat the villains. They simply survived them."

EDWARDS: This Just In ... Television Works

Open Left's Mike Lux reports: "New polling I've seen this week seems to show Edwards' TV ads have stabilized his situation and kept him within shouting range of Clinton and Obama. One of those same polls also shows confirmation of what I had seen from some private polls that Edwards is strong enough in the 2nd choice race to pick up a lot of ground on caucus night. This combination of factors has Edwards' position much strengthened."

OBAMA: The Man With The Plans

Commenting on Barack Obama's new focus on pension plans AMERICAblog's Chris in Paris writes: "As a 40-something year old, I ask, what the heck is a pension plan? I remotely know a few old time IBMers who have pension plans but that's about it. I can't think of a single person in my group of friends of my generation or younger who will ever see a pension plan. ... There's plenty to work with around individual retirement plans and that's our future, so talk to us. We're listening, but need to hear something better than problems that have existed for decades and are about the past."

In more positive Obama blogging Matthew Yglesias likes Obama's "continue funding for Pakistan in the Foreign Operations bill in the areas of counter-terrorism funding, public education, health, micro-enterprise development, humanitarian assistance, and democracy and rule of law programs" plan. Yglesias adds: "Basically, you'd be pressure the Pakistani military to pressure Musharraf to get back on a path to civilian rule. As I say, seems like a decent idea for the short-term."

GOP FIELD: Good News For Rudy

RedState polled readers on "What should be our top specific policy interest for the GOP POTUS candidates?" The top three vote getters: Appoint strict constructionist judges - 35%; Use all measures to stop Iran from going nuclear - 13%; Make the Bush tax cuts permanent - 11%

GIULIANI: Bad News For Rudy

There was not a ton of conservative commentary on the indictment of Rudy Giuliani friend/ex-NYC police commissioner Bernie Kerik, but what there was was not positive. Michelle Malkin blogs: "The grass-roots conservative base is sick and tired of cronyism and open-borders arrogance-two traits that dominate the Bush White House, two traits on naked display in the intertwined fates of Rudy Giuliani and Bernie Kerik, two traits that dangerously undermine public confidence and public safety."

NRO's Jim Geraghty writes: "I actually think the Bernie Kerik factor is "priced-in" to Giuliani's numbers. The moral and legal failings of Kerik have been out there since 2005, and in that time, Giuliani has become and has held his position as frontrunner in the GOP field."

In more positive Giuliani blogging, reactions from Pat Robertson's endorsement are still trickling in. The Corner's Kate O'Beirne reports: "Just back from being with some committed conservatives, veterans all when it comes to ideological battles. The consensus was that Pat Robertson's endorsement helps Rudy - not because he commands the allegiance of the "easily led" but because it provides a significant "Exhibit A" rejoinder to the charge that Christian conservatives simply won't support Giuliani."

The Corner's Larry Kudlow adds: "Pat Robertson's endorsement of Rudy Giuliani is huge. It tells social conservatives that it's okay to vote for Rudy. It also shows that evangelicals are divided on the race. There's no monolithic movement in favor of any major candidate. This is really important. It means no third-party candidacy from the Christian right."

Finally, The Brody File reminds us why he hasn't commented on the Robertson nod: "I know a lot of you are wondering why I haven't written about the Pat Robertson endorsement. Let me explain. Since CBN is a non-profit 501c3 organization and does not support or oppose candidates for public office, I simply cannot comment on it through CBN television or Internet outlets."

ROMNEY: Bounce Or Thud Out Of IA?

The Corner's David Freddoso looks at recent polling showing Romney up in IA and NH as well as gaining ground in SC and comments: "If he wins those three, he will win Florida and do well enough on Feb. 5 to take it away. We'll have to see what the next poll looks like in Michigan, but I'm feeling more confident about the first part of my prediction."

RCP Blog's Steven Stark links to Marc Ambinder reports that Mike Huckabee "is essentially moving into Iowa for the next two months" and comments on Romney's chances: "That means that for all intents and purposes, Iowa now looks like it is in the process of getting reduced to a Huckabee vs. Romney contest, with the winner getting the pole position to become the alternative to Giuliani or McCain. ... the better strategy now might be for the others simply to write it off and head elsewhere. If all Romney does is beat Huckabee in Iowa, what kind of bounce will he get out of that?"

Power Line's Paul Mirengoff is also seeing cracks in Romney's IA-NH armour: "Assume that Romney wins in Iowa and New Hampshire, and let's throw in another early state or two (say, South Carolina and/or Michigan). Would this make Romney unstoppable? Lots of astute folks seem to think so, but I'm not sure. Much would depend, I suspect, on how Romney is faring in the head-to-head match-up with Hillary Clinton at that point. ... it may be quite difficult for Romney to seal the deal with Republicans unless either he gets significantly closer to Hillary in the head-to-head or Hillary pulls away from Giuliani and McCain.

THOMPSON: A Full Minute Man

Campaign Standard's Richelieu adds his two cents on Fred Thompson's IA ad buy: "Solid first spot from Big Fred Thompson. The spot that counts is the :60, which is a smart but expensive move. ... The :30 version is weaker; Fred needs the time the :60 gives him. ... Although Thompson is vulnerable on the 100 percent pro-life stuff - he has yet to clearly explain what specific pro-life legislation he'd support at the state level - the overall message in the ad is strong and the spot is very well produced. It will do him plenty of good among Iowa caucus goers."

At NRO, Jim Geraghty failed to catch the Country Music Awards despite a tip from a 'Thompson Associate' but looking at coverage, he is not impressed with Thompson 'buzz'. Geraghty writes: "While Thompson's attendance has been mentioned - he was a guest of John Rich of Big & Rich, who apparently has "Vote Fred 08" on his guitar - he didn't appear to make a huge splash."

NM SENATE: What More Does Tom Want?

DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas commissioned a Research 2000 poll for NM Senate likely candidates including the following matchups:

Rep. Heather Wilson (R) 45
Albuquerque Mayor Marty Chavez (D) 42

Rep. Heather Wilson (R) 44
LG Dianne Denish (D) 43

Rep. Heather Wilson (R) 38
Rep. Tom Udall (D) 55

Markos comments: "Run, Udall, Run!" MyDD's Jonathan Singer links and adds: "Lo and behold, Tom Udall, who has been subject to a robust draft effort, is by far the strongest Democrat looking at this open seat race. ... With Udall seemingly the strongest candidate -- and a strong progressive, to boot -- and Marty Chavez already going negative even before Udall jumps in the race, the time is right to head over to DraftUdall.com or the Draft Udall Act Blue page to show your support for the Congressman and to let him know you want him to run."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Why Centrism Will Never Die

Commenting on Blue Dog centrism, Atrios blogs: "Let's be clear that "centrism" is, for the most part, a cosmetic pose for the benefit of Beltways journalists who know that The Most Important Thing Is To Be A Centrist."

More Atrios: "In terms of what those centrists actually support in terms of policy, I'd say there are roughly 3 kinds of things. Occasionally they live up to their name and push through genuine compromises between left and right. More often than that they push fake "split the baby" compromises which achieve nothing genuine but have the appearance of doing "something." ... And, most often, "centrism" is used as a cover for what amounts to bipartisan endorsement of corruption in the name of furthering the Might and Majesty of the establishment powers."

LEST WE FORGET: Follow The Nerdherd

Following links from The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum, we find tips from superstar chef Anthony Bourdain on how to find the best restaurant for you in new cities: "take the city you want to go to and just google up some restaurant names that serve the dish you're after. Then go to chowhound or another foodie site, and rather than asking about restaurants, you put up an enthusiastic post talking about how you just had the best whatever you're looking for at one of these restaurants. ... At that point, what drivingblind likes to call the nerdfury will begin. Posters will show up from nowhere to shower you with disdain, tell you how that place used to be good but has now totally sold out and - most important to your quest - will tell you where you would have gone if you were not some sort of mouth breathing water buffalo."

Posted by Conn Carroll at November 9, 2007 12:41 PM