Novak: McCain Might Pull Out Of Iowa
History might be about to repeat itself for the McCain campaign. Robert Novak reports that McCain is going to consider pulling out of the Iowa caucus and focusing his attention on New Hampshire, as he did in 2000.
Novak says McCain would do so in order to lessen the embarrassment of fifth place showing behind Romney, Huckabee, Giuliani and Thompson. McCain also placed fifth in Iowa in 2000, when he did not contest the state, coming in behind Bush, Forbes, Keyes and Bauer.
Comments (10)
kjoe wrote on November 17, 2007 2:34 PM:So you report the non story from Novak--------did you get a call pressuring you not to say anything about Novak's accusation of what Hillary's campaign is doing regarding a whisper campaign against Obama?
When I read about it on Ben Smith's blog, my take was that Hillary and obama should both send a rep to confront novak and tell him to put up or shut up.
Your lack of reporting makes me wonder if that would be inconvenient for Hillary's campaign.
By the way---Obama runs stronger than Hillary in the poll below where you quote hillary's matchups only.
Daniel wrote on November 17, 2007 2:38 PM:Come on kjoe, this is an interesting report as well... and actual news. The other report you are alluding to is only important because Obama jumped on it to accuse Clinton of organizing a smear campaign against him.
bg wrote on November 17, 2007 3:16 PM:I gotta concur with kjoe here. Where are you on this story? It's really interesting to watch it being framed and spun by all interested parties at lightning speed. If nothing else, this signals a new level of animus in the Democratic primary.
someone wrote on November 17, 2007 3:32 PM:The obama/hillary/novack story is exactly the type that I come to EC to get info on.
WTF?
someone wrote on November 17, 2007 3:35 PM:The lastest from Obama:
"The ‘experience’ America's looking for today is not the practiced Washington art of evasion and deflection. Once again, the Clinton campaign refuses to answer two simple, direct questions:DemAC wrote on November 17, 2007 3:41 PM:Are "agents" of their campaign spreading these rumors? And do they have "scandalous" information that they are not releasing?
"Yes or no?"
Geeez, Obama seriously need to chill. Novak is full of s—t.
And how comes that the “Politics of Hope” suddenly equals “Throw wild accusations at Hillary Clinton”?
JustOneGuy wrote on November 17, 2007 3:56 PM:Iowa is weird. How are we supposed to explain the fact that in current polling Hillary beats all the Republicans EXCEPT McCain, yet McCain is the least popular of the major Republicans in Iowa?
Remember, this is the state that gave us John stinking Kerry last election when we could have had a candidate willing to put up a fight.
I don't know what to expect January 3, but clearly Iowans will have a huge effect on the state of the Democratic primary race, and likely on the entire world.
CalD wrote on November 17, 2007 11:23 PM:I still have spreadsheets with running averages and charts of polls I made for both the primary (early states plus national) and general elections in 2004 -- I'm basically a total political junkie and there was no pollster.com to do all that work for us 4 years ago. Anyway, I thought of something yesterday and dug out my 2004 primaries spreadsheet and sure enough, if the Iowa caucuses had been held the first week in January and the NH Primary was mid-month It's likely Howard Dean would have won both.
DemAC wrote on November 18, 2007 7:43 AM:CalD,
I got your point. But, on the other hand, if the dates had been different in 2004 don’t you think the whole dynamic of that campaign would have played out differently; the voters would have made “hard” decisions earlier, the Kerry and Edwards camps would have made their final push earlier etc etc etc.
Change an important variable like the date of the caucuses and you sort of get an entirely new timeline of events altogether.
correctnot right wrote on November 18, 2007 11:52 PM:funny how the Hillary supporters are blaming this on Obama:
the clinton campaign was mentioned in a unspecified smear on Obama - if Hillary was on top of things she would:
1. Deny the smear
2. Deny that she had any involvement in it.
Obama jumped on it as he should - after the swiftboat we should not let false accusations lie out there for days.
Yes - Novak is not a real journalist and is probably just rying to muddy the water - but experience tells us to challenge this crap immediately - not to be evasive or fail to directly address it as Hillary has...
No this bodes poorly for Hillary - blaming Obama for going after this- when this is exactly the right strategy - Kerry failed to go after things right away and they festered....
Hillary has had too many gaffes lately - plus I can't tell where she is on some issues.
I will vote for any Democrat - but Hillary is not impressing me....


