February 06, 2008

2/6: The Morning After

Like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama's own spin-masters, liberal bloggers are interpreting yesterday's Super Tuesday election results in starkly different ways. Several bloggers, including Markos Moulitsas, think that Obama had a great night because he won 13 states and kept the overall delegate race close. Other bloggers think that HRC was the real winner because she won CA and held onto her Northeast strongholds such as NJ and MA. More and more bloggers are speculating about a brokered convention in which superdelegates (as well as MI and FL's delegates) determine the Dem nominee.

Conservative bloggers are slowly reconciling themselves to the fact that John McCain will probably be the GOP nominee. McCain's speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) on 2/7 is going to be a key moment in his campaign, and many conservative bloggers will be in attendance. Will McCain successfully assuage their concerns about his record on judicial nominations and taxes? Johnny Mac will never be able to win over all conservatives, but if can win over some, it will be a significant victory.

DEM FIELD: A Good Night For Obama?

Liberal bloggers differ sharply as to whether Obama or HRC had the better night. Several bloggers think Obama came out on top:

Moulitsas: "Huge night for Obama...[He] has, at this point, won 11 states, of 22 in play. Worst-case scenario, he's already won half. If he picks up Alaska, which I suspect he will, he wins the battle of the states...California is looking like it might head SUSA's way, so that'll be good news for Hillary. But the rest of the night is bleak. She didn't exceed expectations anywhere. She lost states she led big in just a few weeks ago. She's hurting for money. The calendar up ahead is tailor made for Obama. The momentum is there."

AMERICAblog's Joe Sudbay: "It is hard for me to see this as anything but a big night for Barack Obama...Obama won 13 states to Clinton's 8 victories (New Mexico is still to be decided). Obama will probably end up winning a few more delegates tonight than Hillary...Worse for Hillary, Obama has the momentum, and has for some time. Stretching out the calendar only helps Obama. He has been steadily catching up to Hillary in state after state, poll after poll -- that's why so many of today's states were actually in play tonight, when most weren't just a couple weeks ago. He has more money than Hillary. And after tonight, even more money will pour into the Obama campaign...Today, I think the tide turned against [HRC]. She was supposed to win today, the nomination was supposed to be hers. She didn't, and it isn't. It was a much better day to be Barack Obama than Hillary Clinton."

Open Left's Chris Bowers: "I can say with about 90% certainty that Obama will still be ahead in pledged delegates heading into Saturday...This is exactly what Obama needed, since without a pledged delegate lead he might have been in some trouble...Instead, for the first time since New Hampshire, Obama now has a clear path to the nomination. The Clinton campaign is going to talk a lot of super delegates and a lot of Florida and Michigan, but right now Obama has the edge of pledged delegates, resources, and momentum generating activists. If he can sweep Beltway Tuesday, avoid a surprise in Wisconsin on February 19th, and then win both Ohio and Texas, he will be the nominee."

The Atlantic's Matthew Yglesias: "If you factor out the more exuberant Zogby-fueled dreams of the weekend, Obama did quite well relative to his baseline of a week ago. The February 5 landscape favored Clinton, and Obama managed to not lose any of 'his' states while poaching Connecticut and narrowly grabbing contested Missouri. Clinton won, but most indications are that she won't have won nearly enough delegates to put this thing out of reach. Now the landscape gets much more favorable for Obama."

DEM FIELD II: ...Or A Bad Night For Obama?

Other bloggers think Obama failed to meet expectations:

TalkLeft's Big Tent Democrat: "Hillary Clinton appears to have won a substantial victory in California capping off a very bad night for Barack Obama. The three most highly contested states on Super Tuesday were Massachusetts, New Jersey and California. Obama was blown out in each of them. Some bloggers and the Obama Network (NBC) will try to spin this away...[but] I think Hillary Clinton stopped Barack Obama for good tonight. I know a lot of bloggers and the Media will go on and on about delegate counts but the point is Obama had his fair shot and he did not deliver today. I do not think he will have another one."

MyDD's Todd Beeton: "Expectations can be a bitch. The recent polls showing Obama moving up (especially in Clinton country i.e. CA & NJ) plus those early exit polls today certainly created some expectations for tonight that simply weren't met, which is fairly ridiculous considering how many states Barack Obama won and the fact that he's actually likely to win more Super Tuesday delegates than Clinton. But the psychological element of what constitutes a win and momentum is very real...the headlines stating that Clinton and Obama 'Trade Victories,' and that the race is 'Not Settled' are telling and indeed represent a non-victory victory for Hillary Clinton; as New Hampshire before it, tonight was the equivalent of hitting a reset button."

TPM's Josh Marshall: "If you look at this from the vantage point of two weeks ago, it's a huge win for Obama, since he was trailing in states across the country by a very big margin. From the vantage point of the last couple days, however, it's much less clear. The hype of his momentum just got a bit out ahead of what he was able to pull off. And in that sense there's very mild echo of New Hampshire, though the Clinton campaign is silly to claim some sort of comeback. There were a handful of states which, had [Obama] won two or more of them, would have taken him from a delegate tie to a decisive win that would have been Clinton seriously on the defensive. But it didn't happen."

OBAMA: The Choice Of The Liberal Intelligentsia

Progressive bloggers and journalists continue to coalesce around Obama:

MyDD's Jonathan Singer: "Obama is the riskier bet -- but he also presents what appears to me to be the greatest potential for upside. Fundamentally, that's what I'm hoping to see. I'm hoping for that win that approaches 55 percent, with 260+ seats in the House and close to 60 seats in the Senate. And to me, the best opportunity to achieve the type of real change that we need today is to have a massive win that brings not only new voters to the Democratic Party but also old voters new to the Democratic Party (i.e. Independents and even Republicans who have voted in the past, but just not for the Democrats)...I [also] think it's time for there to be a generational change in the leadership of this country. The baby boomers have had their two decades at the helm of power...Perhaps it's time to see a new generation that isn't hung up on Vietnam and other related issues come to the fore and lead this country."

The Nation's Katha Pollitt: "When Obama won Iowa, I was surprised that I was glad. Much as I would love to pull the lever for a woman president -- a pro-choice Democratic woman president, that is -- I realized at that moment how deeply unthrilled I was by the prospect of a grim vote-by-vote fight for the 50 percent+1 majority in a campaign that would rehearse all the old, (yes, mostly bogus or exaggerated) scandals and maybe turn up some new ones too...[Obama]'s a natural politician who connects with people as Hillary Clinton, for whatever reason, just doesn't, and appeals to the better angels of their nature. He sparks an enthusiasm in people -- independents, the young, the previously disengaged. An Obama victory could have big positive repercussions for progressive politics."

The Washington Independent's Spencer Ackerman prefers Obama to HRC on foreign policy grounds: "McCain, a war hero, has national-security bona fides that few candidates possess. He will be able to inhabit the space Clinton has carved out for herself over the past two years: sober critic and skeptic of Bush. However, he'll also be able to pounce on her inconsistency and vacillation, if Thursday's debate is any indication, in a replay of the 'flip-flopper' charge that doomed Kerry four years ago. Unlike Obama, Clinton will have no way of pivoting to a broader indictment of the militarism that McCain cheerfully espouses."

Ezra Klein comments on this growing "elite consensus for Obama": "Some of those endorsements were expected. Some were not. But I really didn't foresee this unanimity. A couple months ago, Hillary Clinton had far more traction among this group, and Obama hadn't come anywhere near assuaging concerns abut his candidacy. I think three things turned the tide decisively against Clinton: The first was her post-Iowa campaign, where Bill Clinton was comparing Obama to Jesse Jackson and an endless procession of hacks were being paraded out to deliver their jabs...The second was that Obama simply got more specific, particularly on foreign policy...And the third force was simply that his victories in Iowa and South Carolina made it look like his movement might be real."

CLINTON: Friends Don't Let Friends Debate On Fox News

The netroots are angry and disappointed that HRC has accepted a debate on the Fox News Channel:

Moulitsas: "Apparently having realized they've lost the netroots and not giving a damn anymore, the Hillary campaign has decided they want to legitimize the right-wing propagandists on Fox News after all...Obama should say 'no way' to the smear mongers on Fox. It's incomprehensible that Clinton would seek to legitimize the Republican Party's chief propaganda arm."

Firedoglake's Jane Hamsher: "Fox is not a news outlet, it's an openly partisan opinion factory and the Democrats should not be legitimizing them (and allowing them to recruit Democratic viewers to propagandize to) by doing this."

Open Left's Matt Stoller: "Glad you made it clear, Senator. I was debating whether to vote on Tuesday, mostly because I don't trust Obama and I think that your female supporters have been attacked and undermined by the media and the political establishment since you got into the race. Now that it's pretty clear you think nothing of the fact that your supporters have been consistently attacked by the right-wing for years, I will proudly cast my vote against you and for Barack Obama next Tuesday. Of course, that is unless Obama accepts the debate. I hope he doesn't. Seriously, Senator Clinton, this is just pathetic."

CLINTON II: Gimme Some Blog Love

Not all progressive elites favor Obama; HRC is racking up some prominent blogger endorsements of her own:

Taylor Marsh: "Hillary Clinton embodies every fight I've ever waged. Every battle I've ever engaged. She is the embodiment of hope for all women, as well as anyone looking for a better life, a fairer break, young, old, poor and poorer. She's got the passion and she's got plans to make them happen."

MyDD's Todd Beeton: "There are two distinct reasons Hillary Clinton has inspired my vote over Barack Obama. First is that I know she will be a partisan warrior. I'm not ready to give up the fight that they started but that we've been waging over the past several years [...] While I have no doubt that Barack Obama is a committed Democrat and wants Democrats all over the country to win, I'm disturbed at times by his reluctance to state proudly that he is a Democrat; he has a real opportunity to rebrand the party but he almost perpetuates the idea that it's a dirty word. The second reason is that I actually believe Hillary Clinton is prepared to take full advantage of the progressive moment we find ourselves in to set a challenging domestic agenda that will not only, as she puts it, 'clean up after this Bush,' but will also set us on a track for a longterm progressive majority."

Daily Kos' brownsox: "I am voting for Hillary Clinton simply because I believe she'd be the best president. [...] I'm confident in her ability to be an effective administrator for the country. I have been deeply impressed by her knowledge, her intelligence, her attention to detail, her preparation, and her diligence. And I am excited about the prospect of her bringing these attributes to the Presidency. [...] I like Barack Obama. [...] But while I hope for a historic change via an Obama presidency, I am more certain of what we're going to get with a Clinton presidency...enough so that I cast my vote for her. If I had a clearer vision of what an Obama presidency would look like, in what fashion he would actually govern, I might well be supporting him. But I don't."

MCCAIN: You Can't Stop What's Coming

Most conservative bloggers believe that McCain is all but certain to win the GOP nod:

Power Line's Paul Mirengoff: "Super Tuesday has made John McCain the presumptive Republican nominee."

NRO's Jim Geraghty: "It's hard to see a scenario in which the next nominee of the Republican party is not John McCain."

Captain's Quarters' Ed Morrissey: "McCain told the Phoenix crowd that he had to 'get used to the idea that we are the Republican front-runner' campaign. The Republican Party will have to get used to it as well. McCain hasn't been welcomed by its activists and its punditry, but its voters have welcomed him -- and done so overwhelmingly."

MCCAIN II: Vote The Party, Not The Person

Hugh Hewitt, who's probably been Mitt Romney's strongest supporter in the conservative blogosphere, urges conservatives to support McCain if he becomes the GOP nominee: "Romney and [Mike] Huckabee ought to begin to note Senator McCain's lead and urge their followers to recognize that if they cannot come back they and their followers will have to come in and join the party's eventual nominee...Putting Humpty Dumpty together again cannot wait for St. Paul. Each of the three need to strike some common chords again and again, beginning with why the GOP needs to retain the White House, regardless of who its nominee is. There are seven reasons for anyone to support the eventual nominee no matter who it is: The war and six Supreme Court justices over the age of 68...These aren't the years to wish a pox on your primary opponents' heads beyond June."

Geraghty praises Hewitt for making this statement: "Hugh is a party man, and a conservative, and a guy who keeps his eye on the long term. (Like him, I never buy into arguments that you win later by losing now.) It's been fun to giggle at how Hugh can find the silver lining to every dark cloud over the Romney campaign, but we ought to salute him for noting the big picture and saying that he'll vote for the more conservative choice in the general election, no matter how strong his passions in the primary."

NRO's Mark Levin feels differently: "To say, from one's computer keyboard, that the [Ronald] Reagan coalition should unify behind McCain to prevent the specter of a Clinton or Obama presidency is, I believe, wishful thinking...Moreover, Republican voters won't buy it. McCain is sitting on a one-legged stool, having broken the two other legs. I think one important focus of Reagan conservatives should be to do all they can to protect as many Republican seats in the House as possible. There needs to be at least one elected part of our government that might be in a position to stem what could be a very unpleasant four years."

MCCAIN III: Time For Some Relationship Mending

Many conservative bloggers are talking about McCain's upcoming speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC):

Ed Morrissey: "With John McCain rolling up some large delegate totals, his upcoming visit to CPAC tomorrow will be a critical point in his campaign...McCain has to start negotiating for support in part on the terms of conservatives. He will likely do so on judicial nominations, pork-barrel spending, and budget reductions. We can also expect to hear reminders that McCain has been pro-life during his entire career, and while he might not support Constitutional amendments favored by the pro-life activists, he isn't going to roll back the work done by the movement over the last twenty-five years."

Townhall's Matt Lewis: "The CPAC speech will tell us a lot about McCain. If it's a stump speech about him being a 'foot soldier in the Reagan Revolution,' we will know that is perfunctory pablum and that he didn't care enough to write something new. In that case, it is likely to assume he didn't want to give the speech, was probably talked into it by his staff, and isn't willing to humble himself by really trying. But if McCain looks us in the eye, acknowledge problems, but promises...promises...he will make conservatives proud on issues ranging from Life, to Judges, to taxes. Then, he has a chance."

Campaign Standard's Stephen F. Hayes provides some insider information: "Conservatives expecting a bouquet of roses from John McCain in the coming days will be disappointed...In discussions with several McCain advisers today, they say they expect him to acknowledge forthrightly some of the differences he has had with conservatives, perhaps with some humor...But the bulk of the speech will be John McCain reminding conservatives of the many issues on which he has been a conservative...McCain will not pander. His advisers think any attempt to do so will undercut his 'straight talk' reputation among independents and many Republicans. What's more, they say, McCain doesn't pander well and would reject any suggestion that he do so."

ROMNEY: Dead Man Walking

RedState's Adam C: "Overall, Romney seemed to hit a ceiling of support based on his coalition. His chance of winning the nomination is negligible."

Townhall's Jonathan Garthwaite: "All the talk of a rally around Romney is looking like just that -- talk."

Matt Lewis: "Despite the strong support of the conservative chattering classes, Mitt Romney has proven he can win his home states of Michigan and Massachusetts. And Utah. He has also won some states that weren't highly-contested, like Nevada and Maine. Oh yeah, he won North Dakota, too...I may be wrong, but I can't think of an instance where has ever won a hotly-contested state where he did not have a natural advantage."

NRO's John Derbyshire: "Mitt is obviously a decent man and a worthy candidate, but there's no escaping the fact that he's failed to raise the metabolic rate of many GOP voters."

HUCKABEE: Guess Who's Bizzack?

Matt Lewis thinks Huckabee ought to be taken more seriously after winning five states on 2/5: "I understand why conservative writers aren't rallying around Huckabee, seeing as how he's a fiscal liberal, and all. But why does he get so little respect as a viable candidate?...He won more states than Romney tonight, but no matter how well he does, I don't know anyone who thinks he has a chance...But I think it's at least worth considering the possibility that it could become a two-man race between Huckabee and McCain."

Campaign Standard's Richelieu disagrees: "Despite all the media excitement, the Happy Huck is having what Wall Street's dark humor calls a dead cat bounce. (You drop a dead cat off a ten story building and it will bounce down the street looking alive when it is in fact quite dead.) Huck will not be the nominee."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: GOP Gloom

NRO's Mark Steyn is worried about the GOP's chances in November:

"The real story of the night, when you look at their rallies and their turn-out numbers, is that the Dems have two strong candidates either of whom could lead a united party to victory. Forget the gaseous platitudes: in Dem terms, their choice on Super Duper Tuesday was deciding which candidate was Super Duper and which was merely Super. Over on the GOP side, it was a choice between Weak & Divisive or Weaker & Unacceptable. Doesn't bode well for November."

LEST WE FORGET: World Leaders Gather To Roast Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

From The Onion:

"In what observers are calling an unprecedented opportunity for the international community to express its grievances against Iran's controversial leader, dozens of world leaders and key U.N. delegates gathered Saturday to roast Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. [...]

Roastmaster and former U.N. secretary general Kofi Annan kicked off the evening by welcoming President Ahmadinejad to 'what [was] sure to be the first and last time Mahmoud would ever be surrounded by 72 virgins.'

'Ladies and gentlemen, and Tony Blair, we stand here in the presence of one of the most vicious and destructive forces in the world today -- but enough about Bea Arthur,' said Annan, gesturing with a tumbler of Makers Mark across the long white tables of chuckling diplomats to the former Golden Girls star. 'Some people here tonight will tell you that Mahmoud refuses to engage in diplomatic talks, that he is the most ruthless stonewaller who has ever lived. Well, those people have obviously never met my first wife.'"

Posted by Ian Faerstein at February 6, 2008 01:16 PM