Clinton Campaign Press Call: “Why Is Obama Hiding From Debates”…Also, ‘This Race Could Go On To June’

The Clinton campaign held a press conference call today. On the call was Mark Penn (Chief Strategist), Howard Wolfson (Communications Director) and Guy Cecil (Political and Field Director). A few notable pieces of information from this call:

On Debates…

The campaign hammered home the point that Barack Obama has refused to debate Hillary Clinton in Wisconsin. Their selling point is that the people of Wisconsin deserve this and that based upon the ratings for the last Clinton-Obama debate, there is considerable demand for such an event. Wolfson at one point indicated what they’d like voters to take away from Obama’s refusal by opining, “Why is Obama hiding from debates?” The campaign also began running a television ad in Wisconsin noting Obama’s refusal to debate there [video].

On Superdelegates…

The campaign stated that this election is a delegate fight and at this point is extremely close and will likely remain that way throughout the remainder of the campaign. Asked whether they were concerned about Dona Brazile’s recent criticisms of superdelegates and her insistence that they vote the will of the people. Wolfson responded by noting that neither campaign can win the nomination without the support of superdelegates.

This, of course, led to a question regarding how those super delegates should vote. The reporter stated: the Obama campaign is saying that whoever is ahead with the pledged delegates, that is the person who the superdelegates should vote for. Wolfson took exception with this state and referred to Obama Chief Strategist, David Axelrod’s remarks regarding superdelegates on The Today Show earlier this week (02/11/08):

LAUER: Let me ask you about superdelegates. A lot of discussion about the role they’re going to play in all this by the time it’s over and the debate being whether they should vote out of loyalty to a candidate, particularly if they’re elected officials, or whether they should vote the way their state or district votes.

So, when it comes to Senators John Kerry and Senator Ted Kennedy, should they vote for had Barack Obama because they’ve endorsed him or should they vote for Hillary Clinton because the state of Massachusetts voted for Hillary Clinton?

AXELROD: I think that the role of the superdelegate is to act as, sort of, a party elder. These are elected officials from across the country and they’re supposed to exercise their judgment as to what would be best for the party. And as they look at this, they need to decide who would be the strongest candidate for the party…

LAUER: David, you’re not answering. Should those two senators vote for Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton?

AXELROD: I think they and all the superdelegates should vote according to what they think is best for the party and the country. And I think that we need the strongest possible candidate against John McCain…

Just to provide a bit of context, Lauer was pressing Axelrod on this issue after a statement Obama made regarding superdelegates a week prior. Speaking on February 7, Obama said:

“[superdelegates] would have to think long and hard about how they approach the nomination when the people they claim to represent have said, ‘Obama’s our guy.’ “

That statement raised some immediate questions regarding its meaning. Specifically, did he mean that superdelegates (like Kerry and Kennedy, who support Obama) in states like Massachusetts should cast their vote for Clinton because she won their state? [Penn tried to make this point on the call today, but his tone tends to undermine some of the points he tries to make]. Or, does he mean that superdelegates should wait until the end of the primary process and then cast their vote for whoever has more pledged delegates? (If he meant this, it certainly didn’t sound like it given his reference to the superdelegates’ constituents). Thus, it’s important to view Axelrod’s comment regarding superdelegates in light of some of the confusion on the issue.

Regardless of the confusion, Wolfson stressed the fact that Clinton campaign is in agreement with the position that Axelrod expressed on The Today Show. In short: they think delegates should vote for who they think is best for party and country and as such they plan to fight for the support of as many as possible.

On the length of the campaign and staying power…

In an attempt to demonstrate the strength of the campaign, Cecil announced that the campaign will be opening offices with staff in all states that have upcoming primaries/caucuses. Following up on this point, a reporter asked if the campaign imagines that the contest could carry on to the Puerto Rico Caucuses on June 7, which is the last nominating contest. The campaign stressed the closeness of race and suggested that it very well could go all the way to Puero Rico. Circling back, Cecil used the closeness of the race as a reason for why offices and staff are being put into all remaining contests.

On Michigan and Florida…

Asked what efforts the campaign was taking to coordinate with Florida and Michigan in order to schedule a vote that can count for delegates, Wolfson expressed the campaign’s position, which is sure to be the most controversial takeaway from the call:

“Our position is the people in Michigan and Florida have already weighed in. [Wolfson then goes on to talk about the record number of participants and
concludes by stating that they believe that their] “will should be honored.”

Just a note…

It’s probably worth mentioning that sitting through these calls can be somewhat painful at times. If you’re a fan of logic and facts, the combination of the campaign’s sometimes strange syllogisms and logical gaps along with some of the mindbogglingly trite or just completely off the wall questions from the press, can lead to a sense of exasperation.