Weird Clinton Campaign Suggestion of the Week

The Obama campaign and its allies are outspending us two to one in paid media and have sent more staff into the March 4 states. In fact, when all is totaled, Senator Obama and his allies have outspent Senator Clinton by a margin of $18.4 million to $9.2 million on advertising in the four states that are voting next Tuesday.

Senator Obama has campaigned hard in these states. He has spent time meeting editorial boards, courting endorsers, holding rallies, and - of course - making speeches.

If he cannot win all of these states with all this effort, there’s a problem.

No need to cite everyone else that’s weighed on this. (Which has happened a lot.) But the message that Obama needs to win all four states next Tuesday when only a week ago none other than Bill Clinton said that Hillary Clinton had to win Ohio and Texas … well, it’s poppycock.

But that’s happening on so many Clinton memos nowadays that it drowns out whatever good they have to say. It’s as if they’re the campaign that cried wolf too many times. …

Sphere: Related Content

John McCain Can Be President. Can We Let That Story Go?

h/t to Goldfarb. I’ve been looking for the most condescending and thorough assault on the foolish idea that the “natural born citizen” clause in the Constitution would prevent McCain from running for president. I think I’ve found it. Yale professor Akhil Reed Amar demolished the argument earlier this month:

The Constitution’s rule that the president be “a natural born citizen” focuses not on where a person became a citizen, but when. To be eligible, one must be born a citizen rather than naturalized at some later date. At the founding, a special constitutional clause provided that even those who had not been citizens at birth could nevertheless become president, if they were citizens circa 1787. Thus, Alexander Hamilton, born in the West Indies, was clearly eligible. All those already in America in 1787 could be trusted; but the framers fretted that an Old World earl or duke might someday sail across the Atlantic with a boatload of gold and bribe his way into the presidency. (Rumor had it that George III’s second son, the Bishop of Osnaburgh, would soon head this way.) Thus, the “natural-born” clause’s main target of concern was not immigrants generally, but wealthy European aristocrats who might wreak havoc in an America lacking strong campaign finance laws.

Read more

Sphere: Related Content

Canadian Television Says Obama’s Position on NAFTA is Just Words; Principals Involved Deny

Canadian news outlet CTV made a fairly startling report today:

Within the last month, a top staff member for Obama’s campaign telephoned Michael Wilson, Canada’s ambassador to the United States, and warned him that Obama would speak out against NAFTA, according to Canadian sources.

The staff member reassured Wilson that the criticisms would only be campaign rhetoric, and should not be taken at face value.

My thoughts and recent developments …
Read more

Sphere: Related Content

Bloomberg Officially Rules Out Run For President

In an op-ed published in today’s New York Times, Mayor Mike Bloomberg officially rules out a run for president, writing:

I listened carefully to those who encouraged me to run, but I am not — and will not be — a candidate for president.

He ads some optimism about the remaining candidates and Read more

Sphere: Related Content

Obama Defense Credo Leaves Some Conservatives Fired Up

A YouTube video featuring Barack Obama offering a defense credo has been referenced by some conservative blogs today (h/t Ambinder).  In the video, Obama says:

I’m the only major candidate who opposed this war from the beginning and as president, I will end it.

Second, I will cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending.  I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems.  I will not weaponize space.  I will slow our development of future combat systems.  And, I will institute an independent defense priorities board to ensure that the quadrennial defense review is not used to justify unnecessary spending.

Third, I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons.  To seek that goal, I will not develop new nuclear weapons.  I will seek a global ban on the production of fissile material.  And, I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off hair trigger alert; and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenals.

I’m not sure what it is Read more

Sphere: Related Content

Mike Gravel Sues Pro-Clinton 527

Mike Gravel’s campaign announced today that he has filed suit against the American Leadership Project, which is an independent pro-Clinton 527. The American Leadership Project plans to about $10 million on television ads, like this one, in Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania. The group has already received a complaint to the FEC filed by supporters of Barack Obama. An official from ALP, Roger Salazar describes the group as follows:

The American Leadership Project is a committee of Americans who have come together to shine a backlight on issues that matter most to our nation’s middle class and do it in a positive way. These are positive ads that serve to raise awareness about these issues at a critical time in our nation’s history and in places where they are paying the most attention. Right now that’s Ohio and Texas. Sen. Clinton is a champion of these issues. ALP supports her positions and we say so in the ads.

Read more

Sphere: Related Content

Obama Campaign Hits One Million Donors

That’s separate donors, not donations. Mightily impressive.

Fearless prediction: we’re only on the brink of a new age of campaign finance. In 2012 or 2016, someone will surpass Obama.

(And it’s no wonder the Obama campaign is drastically outspending the Clinton campaign in Texas and Ohio.)

Sphere: Related Content

Live Blog Of MSNBC Democratic Debate In Cleveland, Ohio (February 26, 2008)

8:19: Underlying themes aplenty. Will Hillary Clinton continue her harsh attacks from the weekend on Barack Obama? Will Obama maintain his cool presence he’s worked hard to maintain in these debates? Will Tim Russert admit he attended law school at Cleveland State on national television? Will Clinton fight back against MSNBC, or have those battles passed? Will Obama keep up his attacks on Clinton? Will Brian Williams ask more or fewer than 4 pointless questions?

We have the answers for you, here, tonight. Live!

8:40: And, we’re up. As you can see, the site has a new layout. It’ll take a few days for us to get everything in order, but if you notice a problem, please let us know. Read more

Sphere: Related Content

6 Things To Know About Northeast Ohio Before The Debate

1. Nafta, Schnafta. The biggest hits in Cleveland are corporations leaving (such as BP) and steel mills closing. And Mexico is no more that one of many players in the story of steel. This started over a decade ago with the Japanese steel dumping fracas. But steel mills have routinely moved over time to find cheaper labor; it started in upstate New York, went through the Rust Belt and is now more foreign than it used to be. It’s hard to imagine those jobs coming back. Read more

Sphere: Related Content

Stunningly Bad Surrogate of the Day: Stephanie Tubbs-Jones

Stephanie Tubbs-Jones is a nice person. I enjoyed her appearance on Colbert. She clearly cares about what she is doing. But I have no idea why the Clinton campaign is counting on her being a powerful surrogate. She’s has almost no competitive electoral experience, and only one competitive race since 1990 - the Democratic primary in 1998 when Louis Stokes retired. Read more

Sphere: Related Content

Drudge Advertisement: “Obama Campaign Glorifies Murderer”

Prominently displayed on the Drudge Report today is an advertisement that reads: “Obama Campaign Glorifies Murderer” (screenshot featured right).

This advertisement appears just a day after the Obama campaign blindly accepted Drudge’s account of Hillary Clinton staffers “circulating” a photo of Obama in a Somalian elder outfit; this ad also serves as a reason why I urged caution before responding harshly to anything solely reported on Drudge without any additional information.

The ad links to an interview discussing Che at the Young America’s Foundation website. The interview doesn’t mention Obama at all nor does it discuss the photos featured in the ad, which only makes the headline more insidious since it leaves people with the impression that Barack Obama supports the guy that the interview proceeds to tear apart.

Several photos of Obama volunteers with a Che Guevara flag in the background began popping up recently. This caused a bit of stir since Che is a controversial figure and it is somewhat unexpected for his identity to be associated with someone running for President of the United States. When the photos first appeared and with little details, people had a right to be angry or confused. However, this story was clarified by the Obama campaign very quickly - the location that these flags appeared at were not official Obama offices; they were funded and operated by volunteers. Alone, this information may not completely calm nerves of voters, but the campaign also issued a pretty strong statement on the matter:

“This is a volunteer office that is not in any way controlled by the Obama campaign. We were disappointed to see this picture because it is both offensive to many Cuban-Americans — and Americans of all backgrounds — and because it does not reflect Senator Obama’s views. Barack Obama has been very clear in putting forward a Cuba policy that is based on one principle: freedom for the Cuban people.”

Now, I realize that detractors may argue that the campaign could have done more or should have done more about the flags in the first place (and people are more than welcome to have that debate, I for one and not interested). However, it is very clear that the Obama campaign is not glorifying Che Guerva as the Drudge ad suggests.

Maybe it’s time for campaigns and readers to start pushing back against flat out incorrect statements and/or inflammatory suggestions, regardless of political affiliation. And further, this process would be easier if campaigns weren’t so quick to validate the legitimacy of certain questionable sources, like Drudge.

Related At 2008Central.net:

• Obama Campaign Overreacting To Drudge Photo? (02/25/08)
• Why The Obama Campaign Had To Overreact (02/25/08)
• We Agree: Obama Overreacted; Now To Clarify… (02/25/08)
• Pay No Attention To This “Controversy” (04/21/07)

Sphere: Related Content

A Taste Of McCain vs. Obama: Demonstrates That Obama Will Need Update Some Of His Arguments

Throughout the Democratic primary, Sen. Barack Obama and others advocating on his behalf have frequently cited his experience living abroad as a child as a boost to his foreign policy credentials.

Early in the campaign in 2007, Obama argued that his experience abroad was a strength, saying:

“If I go to Jakarta and address the largest Muslim country on earth, I can say, ‘Apa kabar,’ — you know, ‘How are you doing?’ — and they can recognize that I understand their common humanity,” Obama said. “That is a strength, and it allows me to say things to them that other presidents might not be able to say. And that’s part of what’s promising, I think, about this presidency.”

Responding to an argument made by Sen. Clinton about his foreign policy credentials last Novemeber, Obama said:

“Probably the strongest experience I have in foreign relations is the fact that I spent four years living overseas when I was a child in southeast Asia.”

Now, it’s worth noting that this is certainly not the only argument that Sen. Obama uses to support his foreign policy experience. But, the discussion of his experience abroad is often used and for the purposes of this post is all that matters since this post is about Obama vs. McCain. My point being a simple one: a revision in his discussion of his foreign policy credentials will definitely need to take place between now and the general election, should he become the nominee. Imagine for a moment Sen. Obama making a similar argument about his experience abroad against Sen. McCain. A look back to McCain’s response to some of his challengers when he first ran for the House of Representatives is enlightening (h/t campaign spot):

McCain faced two experienced state legislators in the Republican nomination process, and as a newcomer to the state was hit with repeated charges of being a carpetbagger. Finally at a candidates forum he gave a famous refutation to a voter making the charge:

“Listen, pal. I spent 22 years in the Navy. My father was in the Navy. My grandfather was in the Navy. We in the military service tend to move a lot. We have to live in all parts of the country, all parts of the world. I wish I could have had the luxury, like you, of growing up and living and spending my entire life in a nice place like the First District of Arizona, but I was doing other things. As a matter of fact, when I think about it now, the place I lived longest in my life was Hanoi.”

Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m not criticizing Obama. To steal an oft used line from JW, we’ll just need to see “Obama 2.0.” He is going to have to restructure many of his current arguments in order to avoid giving McCain an opening for a great comeback.

That’s all.

[Photo Credit: Obamarama]

Sphere: Related Content

A Friendly Reminder: Don’t Stab People That Disagree With You Politically

Just a friendly reminder from the editors of 2008Central.net: We strongly advise against stabbing someone because they say unkind things about the political candidate you support.  In other words, don’t do what this guy did:

[Jose Oritz and Sean Shurelds are brothers-in-law.  Oritz allegedly stabbed Shurelds after an argument about presidential candidates]

Shurelds, an Obama supporter, told Ortiz that the Illinois senator was “trashing” Clinton (apparently in regard to recent primary and caucus results). Ortiz, a Clinton supporter, replied that “Obama was not a realist.” While not exactly fighting words, the verbal political tiff led to some mutual choking and punching. And, allegedly, a stabbing in the abdomen

Sphere: Related Content

Dodd Set To Endorse Obama

We have our first former Democratic candidate endorsement … and for those of you waiting on the edge of your seats for Edwards or Richardson, be prepared to be a bit disappointed. Chris Dodd is endorsing Barack Obama Tuesday in my hometown, Cleveland, Ohio before the Democratic Debate. This will be welcome news for Obama, who seems to be rolling out a big endorsement a week now.

Dodd will endorse his colleague, a senator from Illinois, in Cleveland on Tuesday, according to a Democratic official close to Dodd who requested anonymity because no formal announcement had been made.

Dodd’s support, coupled with his liberal credentials, could provide a boost for Obama as major contests near in big states such as Ohio and Texas on March 4. Obama has won some key Democratic endorsements in recent weeks, including Massachusetts Sen. Edward Kennedy, a close friend of Dodd.

Obama and rival Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton had been vying for Dodd’s support since he exited the presidential race after a poor showing in the Iowa caucus last month. Dodd, who won his Senate seat in 1980 and chaired the Democratic National Committee from 1995-1996, has long-standing ties to the Clintons.

Dodd is a “superdelegate,” one of nearly 800 Democratic officeholders and party officials who automatically attend the national convention and can vote for whomever they choose. They have become an important force in the close race between Clinton and Obama, and both candidates are lobbying hard for their support.

Now, let’s be honest: Dodd does not have any significant popular support outside of Connecticut, where Obama already won. But he has a strong record with liberals, particularly on FISA at the moment. He also was endorsed previously by IAFF, the union that carried Kerry to victory in the 2004 primary, and he might have sway in getting them to join the other unions that have recently joined Obama. That would be a major get for Obama, since there currently is a divide between government oriented unions (AFSCME, NEA) that support Clinton and non-government ones (SEIU, UCW, Change to Win) that support Obama. Moreover, firefighters are just more inspiring and credible than any of the other unions I listed (no offense intended). Furthermore, IAFF president referred to Obama’s support in mid-January as “breathtaking.”

But with the strong Obama vibe at dailykos, it’s not that surprisng Dodd joined along, as he was their second favorite candidate and he had been hinting Obama might not be able to be stopped. With Edwards joining Obama endorsers SEIU and Moveon.org for an anti-war effort Monday, he may be next in line. But clearly that’s speculative at this point. I’m reasonably sure, though, that Richardson will not endorse until he can be 100% sure he is backing the winning candidate. He has everything to lose by endorsing wrong and little to gain from jumping in too early.

This does offer me one last chance to use my favorite Dodd picture of the cycle; I encourage everyone to read the caption for what will probably be one last time. (Dodd is in no way a VP candidate, let’s nip that in the bud; cabinet possibility, sure.)

Sphere: Related Content

Mitt Romney May Re-enter GOP Presidential Race, So Says His Son…

Josh Romney, one of Mitt Romney’s sons, made some news by suggesting that his father could return this election cycle as either a vice-presidential candidate or as a presidential candidate (if John McCain’s campaign “falters”).

Josh Romney is also mulling over a congressional bid in Utah’s second district.  I think Josh’s own political future is part of the reason he may have talked about a possible return of his father to the presidential trail (the reference to his father means that an otherwise minor story will get more attention).  I think it’s very unlikely that Gov. Romney returns as either a VP candidate or as a presidential candidate.

Josh also took a swipe at John McCain when he indicated that he will not likely campaign for McCain:

“It’s one thing to campaign for my dad, someone whose principles I line up with almost entirely.  I can’t say the same thing for Sen. McCain.”

Is Josh aware that the race is over?

Sphere: Related Content

We Agree: Obama Overreacted; Now To Clarify…

Earlier today, I put up a post providing an overview of the events surrounding today’s Drudge headline that featured Sen. Obama in a Somalian elder outfit. In the post, I also argued that the Obama campaign’s response was an overreaction. Specifically at issue was part of the Obama campaign’s response where the campaign manager said:

“On the very day that Senator Clinton is giving a speech about restoring respect for America in the world, her campaign has engaged in the most shameful, offensive fear-mongering we’ve seen from either party in this election.”

John responded in a post entitled “Why The Obama Campaign Had To Overreact,” where he concludes:

It’s possible Plouffe went overboard, clearly. But to say that they should not respond critically at all because there are unanswered questions about a source is clearly the worst possible alternative.

First, it’s not “possible Plouffe went overboard;” he did, clearly. But more importantly, I never suggested that Obama not respond critically. Rather, I recognized a very clear overreaction that also contained flat out untrue statements and I noted it. Indeed, it is important for campaigns to respond to negative press as rapidly as possible. But, it’s equally as important that the response be appropriate.

To recap:

• We agree that the story is uncorroborated or at least contains many questions
• We agree that the Obama campaign overreacted
• We agree that Obama needed to respond
• We agree that the Clinton campaign’s initial response was bad (and dumb)

Sphere: Related Content

Clinton Campaign: Caucus or Death?

The Texas Primary includes both a primary vote and a caucus. The vote is to measure the width of support - who has the most supporters. The caucus, meanwhile, is to measure the depth of support - who cares the most. It’s a system I like more the more I read about it, since it resolves a lot of the problems traditionally associated with voting (Person A, who cares a lot, has equal say with Person B, who does not care who wins and chooses randomly). This rewards passion in supporters, while not solely basing it on passion. That’s a good thing, from where I sit.

But Bill Clinton thinks otherwise:

“The doors open at 7 and they close at 7:15. It would be tragic if Hillary were to win this election in the daytime and somebody were to come in at night and take it away.”

I can only presume that Bill is busy writing the concession speech if Obama wins the primary vote and loses the caucus vote.

It’s amazing how the Clinton campaign refers to caucuses as undemocratic but does not apply the same label to superdelegates.

Sphere: Related Content

Why The Obama Campaign Had To Overreact

Like underwater sea spiders near Antarctica, the direct response post here is rare, but in this time, called for.

Angelo asks:

But still, it may serve everyone to actually think about the report, ask why Obama’s campaign just blindly followed Drudge’s account and if their response wasn’t a bit of an overreaction.

I think it’s pretty simple. The Obama campaign learned from the Kerry campaign that you simply cannot let these types of attacks linger; it’s better to fight back first, and if found to be untrue, apologize later.

A reader writes Ben Smith:

1) The proof that he is aware of how these things get out of hand and is ready, per J. Mart.’s advice, to respond to them forcefully right away?

2) The proof he knows how to play hardball politics to score cheap points against an opponent, which the Clinton campaign keeps saying he isn’t ready to do? Imagine what you journos would have said if he had demurred and “waited to know the sourcing of the story”!

I don’t completely agree; I don’t think waiting for this type of story to be sourced is a good tactic. It’s possible Plouffe went overboard, clearly. But to say that they should not respond critically at all because there are unanswered questions about a source is clearly the worst possible alternative.

As it is, all Maggie Williams had to do was to deny they willingly were ciruclating it (as Wolfson later has) and to say anyone doing it would be reprimanded, as per campaign policy, and this would be a non-story.

Two last accounts I liked. First, Chadwick Martin at Trailhead: Read more

Sphere: Related Content

Next Page »