Hillary Clinton is hitting back at Barack Obama over campaign mailers that attack her stances on health care and free trade. "Shame on you, Barack Obama," she bluntly told reporters today in Ohio.

The mailers in question say that her health plan would force people to spend money on health coverage even if they can't afford it, and also that she considers NAFTA to be a "boon" to the economy. Recent reports have argued that Hillary actually opposed NAFTA at the time, but could not publicly disagree with her husband's policies.

As for the health care issue, Hillary said the Obama camp were being bad Democrats: "It is blatantly false and yet he continues to spend millions of dollars perpetuating falsehoods. It is not hopeful. It is destructive, particularly for a Democrat to be discrediting universal health care."

Obama spokesman Bill Burton did not give an inch. "Everything in those mailers is completely accurate," Burton said in a statement, "unlike the discredited attacks from Hillary Clinton's negative campaign that have been rejected in South Carolina, Wisconsin, and across America."

Late Update: Here's some video from Hillary's press conference:

Hillary Clinton has a new one-minute ad in Texas and Ohio, featuring what was probably her best moment at the debate on Thursday. The candidate declared that no matter what happened to her — an implied reference to her campaign troubles — it was nothing compared to to the problems that everyday Americans face, especially the disabled veterans she visited with in Texas:

This is pretty great. Today's Washington Post piece all about the fact that John McCain is surrounded by lobbyists on his campaign has gotten lots of attention today. It's key context for understanding the big Times story yesterday about his allegedly improper relationship with that female lobbyist, as well as his constant railing against lobbyists and "special interests."

But the piece has a lovely and very revealing little nugget buried in it that has passed unnoticed. It turns out that one of McCain's top advisers, lobbyist Charlie Black, does lots of his lobbying from the Straight Talk Express. From aboard the bus itself...

Of all the lobbyists involved in the McCain campaign, the most prominent is Black...even as Black provides a private voice and a public face for McCain, he also leads his lobbying firm, which offers corporate interests and foreign governments the promise of access to the most powerful lawmakers. Some of those companies have interests before the Senate and, in particular, the Commerce Committee, of which McCain is a member.

Black said he does a lot of his work by telephone from McCain's Straight Talk Express bus.

The snark fails...

Late Update: FireDogLake's TeddySanFran, who flagged this first, has a good line about Black: "I wonder if he expects a desk in McCain's Oval Office?"

Hillary Clinton has a new ad in Texas, promoting her as the candidate who can deliver real results. Without referring to him, the unstated message is that Barack Obama is just talk, without results.

"In Texas, when there's work to be done, talk doesn't cut it," the announcer says, in a mild Southern accent seemingly picked to appeal to rural voters. "You gotta roll up your sleeves, stand your ground and deliver."

Two Ohio ads are available after the jump.

Read more »

The Associated Press reports that Barack Obama has picked up 25 super-delegate votes in the two and a half weeks since his narrow Super Tuesday win, a sign that those in the party establishment are lining up behind the candidate expected to win the pledged-delegate vote.

Only 60 supers are now separating them by the AP's count, and Hillary has even lost a net two since Super Tuesday. It's the kind of news that should calm any fears — or dash any hopes, as the case may be — about super-delegates deciding the nomination over the popular will.

Two Hillary campaign sources -- an adviser and a major donor -- have provided to me the argument that Hillary's advisers and pollsters are privately making to donors and supporters as to why it's too early to count her out of the race.

According to the adviser and donor, Hillary advisers are telling people -- when they're sounding optimistic tones designed to sooth jittery donors -- that the campaign's internal polling shows her up over five points in her key firewall states of Ohio and Texas.

"The lowest number I've heard from them is eight," the donor tells me. The campaign won't publicly discuss such numbers for fear of creating unrealistic expectations.

The adviser and donor tell me that the argument being made from inside is that if she can win both those states by between five and 10 points, she can at least begin to close Obama's lead in pledged delegates to within somewhat more manageable numbers.

The hope is threefold.

Read more »

Russ Feingold has now given his support to Barack Obama in a way that practically qualifies as an endorsement in all but name: Feingold divulged that he personally voted for Obama in the Wisconsin primary, and said that he will likely continue to support Obama in his capacity as a super-delegate.

"I really do think that at the gut level, this is a chance to do something special," Feingold said. Feingold had previously declined to publicly endorse before the primary.

A new set of SurveyUSA polls is a mixed bag for both Hillary Clinton's and Barack Obama's arguments about electability. Obama does better than Hillary against John McCain in some states — Kansas, Minnesota, New Mexico and Oregon — while Hillary does better in Massachusetts and, perhaps most importantly, Ohio. And they run about the same in Alabama, California and Missouri.

Either one of them could beat John McCain in Ohio, a state that could potentially decide the presidency, but Hillary does quite a bit better. She tops mcCain 52%-42%, while Obama wins by a narrower 47%-44%.

But there's good news for both of them and their supporters: Before he actually clinched the Republican nomination, McCain was much stronger against both Democrats in practically all these states. But with McCain now leading the unpopular GOP, and with the Dems getting more attention as their primary continues, they have risen and he has fallen.

The full numbers are available after the jump.

Read more »

The Obama camp continues to press the argument that he's the more electable Dem today, sending out a memo highlighting what it wants us to see as the key moment from yesterday's debate: Hillary's criticism of John McCain for supporting the Iraq War.

The moment that the Obama camp is pointing to came yesterday, when Hillary attacked McCain for supporting "the wasteful tax cuts of the Bush administration and the Iraq war." To which the Obama camp's memo has now rejoined:

The question is: how can Senator Clinton attack Senator McCain for authorizing the war, when she cast the very same vote?

When it comes to the key issues facing the American people, Obama is the one Democrat in this race who can give voters the clearest choice in this election. Obama opposed the war in Iraq, Clinton supported it. Obama has been clear on torture, Clinton has not...

Barack Obama, on issue after issue against McCain, offers the opportunity to choose change we can believe in versus a third term of George Bush’s policies.

This is a key argument Obama will try to use to close this thing out -- a case that's forward looking and seeks to reassure Dems about his electability in the general election.

As noted here yesterday, new polling from The Washington Post suggests that he's winning the argument over who's more electable, finding that Dems say he's better positioned to win in November by a greater than 10-point margin in both states.

Late Update: It's worth noting that another benefit of this argument is that it allows the Obama camp to remind the electorate of Hillary's war vote in a forward-looking manner.

Two new polls from Rasmussen show the primary races tightening in Texas and Ohio — with Hillary's previous big lead in Texas down to a dead heat. Here are the numbers, compared to the polls released only a week ago:

Ohio:
Clinton 48% (-3)
Obama 40% (+3)

Texas:
Clinton 47% (-7)
Obama 44% (+6)

Obama has demonstrated a clear pattern in many primary states of badly trailing Hillary until just a week or two before the primary, at which point the race tightens and then he even takes a good-sized lead. If that pattern holds here, it won't be good news for Hillary.

In a strongly-worded interview with Texas Monthly, Hillary leaves very little doubt that the campaign is preparing to get serious about getting the Florida and Michigan delegations seated.

"The people of those two states disregarded adamantly the DNC’s decision that they would not seat the delegates. They came out and voted," Hillary told the mag. "They wanted their voices heard. More than 2 million people came out. I mean, it was record turnout for a primary."

Asked if it's her intention to press the issue, Hillary said:

"Yes, it is. Yes, it is. It’s in large measure because both the voters and elected officials in Michigan and Florida feel so strongly about this. Senator Bill Nelson, of Florida, early on in the process actually sued because he thinks it’s absurd on its face that 1.7 million Democrats who eventually voted would basically be disregarded, and I agree with him about that."

Mark Halperin says that this is "some of her strongest language on the topic." Indeed, it leaves little doubt that this is a key component of the Clinton campaign's endgame, and they're not giving up on it easily.

The rest of Hillary's comments here.

The fallout from the big McCain-lobbyist story in The New York Times continues today: Editors and reporters who worked on the story are now taking questions about it from the public.

My list of questions is right here.

Here's a taste of what we can expect from the Republicans in the general election season, now that the primaries seem to be almost over. The House GOP has posted a Web video attacking the Democratic leadership for not moving to renew the Protect America Act, with the very straightforward message that the Dems will get us all killed by the gun-waving Muslims:

This video seems like it's more than just a political ad — it's almost as if it's a commercial for the next season of 24. And we'll be seeing a lot more of this stuff all year long.

Here's a sign that the Republicans are now under the working assumption that Barack Obama, not Hillary Clinton, will be their opponent this year. Chuck Todd pointed out last night that as of 9:08 p.m., the Republican national Committee had sent out six of the customary press releases attacking the opposition candidates for their debate responses.

The catch: All of them were against Obama. They didn't even hedge their bets by sending out one press release that went after Hillary.

With Hillary Clinton's campaign going downhill, a lot of big donors are now expressing their discontent with the way the finances have been handled, from the high-paid political consultants to the ostentatious spending on luxury hotels.

Former campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle came under particular scrutiny for some of the big spending, not only in the presidential race but in Hillary's easy 2006 re-election, which managed to spend $30 million without having a major opponent. "The Senate race spending in 2006 was an omen for a lot of us inside the campaign," said one anonymous fundraiser, "but Hillary assured us that her presidential bid would be the best run in history."

Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ), a stalwart conservative who ran unsuccessfully for majority leader and minority whip in 2006, has reversed his decision from last week to retire. Shadegg's decision was seen by many as a sign of lost confidence among the House GOP, and many of his fellow Republicans asked him to stay on.

"I am overwhelmed and humbled by the reaction of my colleagues," Shadegg told National Review. "When the conservative movement asks you to stick around, that's a pretty tough request to turn down."

Here's Hillary's emotional closer at the debate, which the on-air pundits are already saying was the breakout moment of her performance tonight. The Hillary camp is hoping that it packs a powerful, game-changing punch. But does it? Is it enough?

CNN's John King happens to witness a mushy backstage moment between Hillary and Obama before the debate:

I was backstage just before the debate, and it became very clear to me that she was not going to come out with a flame-thrower, as many thought she might have to do given her position in the race right now. At first they stood several feet, probably 15 feet away from each other, not acknowledging each other. And then she walked up to him and said, “Hey, Barack.” And he turned to her very warmly, put his arm around her and said, “Hey, Hillary, how are you?”

Hillary is really cranking up the attacks on -- or "drawing contrasts with" -- Obama on every front. As noted below she hit him over that hapless surrogate's inability to name any Obama accomplishment. Now she's hit him on the charges that he's "lifted" speech lines. Hillary:

Well, I think that if your candidacy is going to be about words, then they should be your own words. That’s I think a very simple proposition. And you know, lifting whole passages from someone else’s speeches is not change you can believe in — it’s change you can Xerox...

There is no doubt that you are a passionate eloquent speaker. And I applaud you for that. But when you look at what we face in this country...it is not enough to say let’s come together.

Late Update: Video of this moment:

Hillary had to draw a sharp contrast with Obama tonight, and it just started in earnest: As might have been expected, she made an explicit and very barbed reference to that hapless State Senator who couldn't name a single Obama accomplishment the other night:

I have to confess, I was somewhat amused the other night when on one of the TV shows, one of Senator Obama’s supporters was asked to name one accomplishment of Senator Obama. And he couldn’t. So I know that there are comparisons and contrasts to be drawn between us. And it’s important that voters get that information. So yes, I do think that words are important, and words matter. But actions speak louder than words.

Obama's response coming.

Late Update: Obama's response:

Well I think actions do speak louder than words, which is why, over the 20 years of my public service, I have acted a lot to provide health care to people who didn’t have it, to provide tax breaks to families that needed it. To reform a criminal justice system that had resulted in wrongful convictions, to open up our government and to pass the toughest ethics reform legislation since Watergate, to make sure that we create transparency in our government so that we know where federal spending is going...

You know, I think if you talk those wounded warriors at Walter Reed, who prior to me getting to the Senate were having to pay for their meals, and have to pay for their phone calls after their family while they’re recovering from amputations, I think they’d say that I’ve engaged not just in talk but in action.

Hillary and Obama squared off yet again over the argument they've been having over the role that the president should play in negotiating with foreign leaders.

Hillary pointed out -- rightly -- that her criticism of Obama's willingness to commit to meeting with hostile foreign leaders in the first year doesn't mean she opposes negotiating with our enemies. Responding to a question about Cuba, Hillary said:

"As president I would be ready, to reach out and work with a new Cuban government once it demonstrated that it truly was going to change that direction... But there has to be evidence that indeed the changes are real, that they’re taking place, and that the Cuban people will finally be given an opportunity to have their future determined by themselves."

But Obama, in his rebuttal, argued that he would be making a more fundamental change in the president's role, recasting the American president's posture towards the rest of the world:

"I do think it is important, precisely because the Bush administration has done so much damage to American foreign relations, that the president take a more active role in diplomacy than might have been true 20 or 30 years ago...If we think that meeting with the president is a privilege that has to be earned, I think that reinforces the sense that we stand above the rest of the world at this point in time."

It needs to be stressed, in watching the debate, that the Hillary camp's belief is that when the two candidates are seated side by side discussing the issues she emerges as the clear victor.

In their opening statements, both sides lay out their messages, as clearly as possible. Hillary plays the work horse card: "There is a lot of work ahead. I offer a lifetime of experience and proven results."

Obama sounds a front-runner's note, saying again that he respects his opponent: "It's a great honor to share the stage again with Senator Clinton." But reiterates that he's the true history-changing figure. More coming.

We're blogging the CNN debate in Texas right here.

Hillary needs to win Ohio and Texas. And the polls are really tightening in both states, but more so in Texas. So the stakes for tonight couldn't be higher.

Stay tuned.

Ben Smith has a nice wrap-up of the skepticism that's greeted the McCain story in many quarters of the liberal blogosphere:

Many widely read liberal bloggers, breaking with partisan patterns, are expressing discomfort with the Times' reporting and offering conditional defenses of McCain...

The defense of McCain from the left reflects well on the blogs' objectivity, and they certainly aren't defending McCain on the substantive issues of the election. Indeed, they've been leading the way in trying to break the mainstream media's long love affair with McCain, to paint him as a Bush conservative and as a dangerous hard-liner on foreign policy and Iraq.

Still, their even treatment of the subject may disturb Democratic strategists who are relying on the bloggers to serve, in every case, as the kind of partisan strike force that conservative blogs and talk radio were in 2004.

A fun postscript: I emailed that last graf -- the one saying that the failure of lib bloggers to toe the partisan line on this story would worry Dem strategists counting on them to be a "partisan strike force" -- to a Democratic operative I know. His response:

"Goddamn right."

New poll numbers from ABC and The Washington Post show that Hillary holds only a single-digit lead over Obama among Dem likely voters in Ohio, while it's a dead heat in Texas:

Ohio: Hillary 50%, Obama 43%

Texas: 48%-47%

The tight numbers suggest that Obama's string of victories has given him momentum heading into these potentially decisive contests. Given Obama's growing lead in delegates, these numbers are far too tight for comfort for Hillary, who needs sizable victories in these states to turn the narrative of the race around.

The poll finds that Hillary leads in both states among her base constituencies -- white women, Latinos and seniors. She holds a sizable edge over white men in Ohio -- perhaps fueled by her support among working class voters.

Meanwhile, Obama holds a clear advantage among white men in Texas and in both states retains a sizable advantage among young and higher-income voters and a huge advantage among blacks.

Tellingly, Obama is apparently winning the argument over who's most electable in November: In both states he holds a greater than 10-point edge in that category.

Full poll here.

The Obama campaign has some very strong words for the American Leadership Project, the 527 that was set up to run ads on Hillary Clinton's behalf. In a conference call with reporters today, campaign general counsel Bob Bauer asserted quite confidently that the ALP is an illegal group, set up as a "rescue operation" to circumvent campaign finance statutes and FEC regulations by raising unlimited amounts of money to run ads for Hillary.

In a move that suggests he might be trying to frighten donors away from even contributing to the effort, Bauer went so far as to say that the donors to the ALP, by helping to organize this group with contributions of as much as $100,000 each, were also going to be legally liable and subject to civil and criminal investigation by the government.

"This is not a case where there's room for argument. This is not a case where they'll be spared by some version of Philadelphia lawyering," Bauer said. "This is absolutely a cold, calculated move to violate the law for the benefit of the candidate, and to assume that any penalty will be so deferred into the future that the immediate benefits can be gained now without consequence."

The irrepressible David Brody of CBN News reports something interesting: An email is circulating among progressive religious leaders and their congregations urging super-delegates who are people of faith to base their decision between Hillary and Obama on who they think the best candidate is:

We are Americans who look to God and the holy texts for our moral compass in our private decisions and civic duties...

That is why we call on all Americans to bring their highest and best selves to this moment in time – to focus on content and character, depth of ideas, and a tangible vision for our future...

Delegates to our national conventions should be bound by principle, beliefs and a shared commitment to the common good that we are all in this together. They are charged with using their judgment individually and collectively to determine who will be our next Democratic nominee for President of the United States.

Brody also says people in these circles are feeling pressure from Obama supporters to flip to his side, and argues that the clergy leaders are right in saying super-dels should vote their principles. It's unclear who authored the email, but if Brody reports it, it's real and significant and represents what clergy leaders are really saying to one another.

Two new polls of Texas show the Democratic primary to be a dead heat, with Hillary Clinton grabbing a narrow lead. Seattle-based Constituent Dynamics, in a poll commissioned for a local TV station, gives Hillary 46% to Barack Obama's 45%. Texas-based IVR has Hillary at 50% to Obama's 45%.

The IVR poll went one step beyond simple statewide polling, and assigned delegates based on the state Senate districts where respondents lived. The result was a bare eight-delegate edge for Hillary from the primary, hinting that she could be in trouble even if that lead holds up — one-third of the Texas delegates will be won in caucuses held later that night, a setting in which the Hillary camp has had a lot of trouble organizing effectively.

The mystery deepens around Obama campaign manager David Plouffe's quiet visit to North Carolina.

Earlier today I noted that Plouffe had popped up in Raleigh, in John Edwards' home state. Plouffe denied he was there to woo Edwards.

But now the Raleigh News and Observer reports that he gave a closed-door talk to a group that included a number of major Edwards backers he was clearly wooing.

The paper also reports that a top Clinton operative is now planning to head to the state to woo financial backers, so clearly, the Hillary camp thinks something's up.

Well, that was pretty predictable. The McCain campaign is already raising money off the uproar over the Times piece, depicting it as nothing more than the work of a left wing cabal -- including the paper, the Democratic Party and of course MoveOn -- that is bent on destroying the GOP nominee.

From a new McCain fundraising email:

Well, here we go. We could expect attacks were coming; as soon as John McCain appeared to be locking up the Republican nomination, the liberal establishment and their allies at the New York Times have gone on the attack. Today's front-page New York Times story is particularly disgusting -- an un-sourced hit-and-run smear campaign designed to distract from the issues at stake in this election. With John McCain leading a number of general-election polls against Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, the New York Times knew the time to attack was now, and they did. We will not allow their scurrilous attack against a great American hero to stand.

To be clear, we think there's much in the story that's legit, particularly the stuff focused on the questions around McCain's professional relationship with the lobbyist and the broader pattern of influence peddling that's alluded to. The anonymous suggestions of a romantic affair, however, have only made it easier for the McCain camp to respond as they did above.

Interestingly, the fundraising email makes no mention of the fact that the paper endorsed McCain.

More on this story right here at The Horse's Mouth.

Late Update: Now the Republican National Committee has a fundraising email out, too, saying: "The New York Times has proven once again that the liberal mainstream media will do whatever it takes to put Senator Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama in the White House."

Today's Gallup national tracking poll shows another fluctuation — after trailing Barack Obama for the last week and a half, Hillary Clinton now has a one-point lead. Here are the numbers for today, compared to yesterday:

Clinton 45% (+3)
Obama 44% (-3)

Some commentary from Gallup: "Clinton's technical one-percentage point lead is the first time she has been ahead of Obama in Gallup Daily Poll tracking since Feb. 9-11, although it is statistically indistinguishable from Obama's one-point lead in Gallup's Feb. 16-18 interviewing."

A new SurveyUSA poll should provide some more ammo for Barack Obama's argument that he's the more electable Democrat — he runs better against John McCain than Hillary Clinton does in her home state of New York:

Clinton (D) 52%, McCain (R) 41%
Obama (D) 57%, McCain (R) 36%

Both would win the state, but it doesn't help Hillary's reputation at all. It would appear that a net 5% of New Yorkers would vote for Obama over McCain, but would choose McCain over Hillary, their own junior senator.

I'm told by the office of Vicki Iseman, the lobbyist whose relationship with John McCain was scrutinized in today's New York Times, that she is weighing whether to make her own statement about the story and may do so later today.

If so, that would obviously give this story another jolt.

Meanwhile, her firm, Alcalde & Fay, has released this statement:

The allegations and malicious innuendo reported by the New York Times yesterday are completely and utterly false. Alcalde & Fay’s relationship with Senator McCain has been professional, appropriate and consistent with his legislative, jurisdictional and constituent duties. The story is based upon the fantasies of a disgruntled former campaign employee and is without foundation or merit. Ms. Iseman is a hard working professional whose 18 year career has been exemplary and she has our full support. It is beneath the dignity of a quality newspaper to participate in such a campaign of character assassination.

A statement from her, however, would be considerably more attention grabbing, since she would probably address the allegations, such as they are, of a romantic relationship with McCain.

Also note that the statement blames the story on a "disgruntled former campaign employee," even though The Times story quotes multiple sources.

More on this story right here at The Horse's Mouth.

David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager, was spotted in Raleigh, in John Edwards' home state of North Carolina, the Raleigh News and Observer reports.

Plouffe swore up and down to the paper that he wasn't there on a stealth mission to court Edwards' endorsement. Instead, he was there to raise money and organize, in the believe that North Carolina's May 6th primary could prove pivotal.

Plouffe seems like a pretty major player to be spending time merely organizing in a state who's primary is over two months away, but we'll take his word for it.

Barack Obama is reportedly getting the endorsement of the Change To Win labor federation, made up of seven big unions that bolted from the AFL-CIO in 2005 to pursue a more activist course. Obama was already endorsed by four of the members unions: SEIU, UNITE-HERE, the United Food and Commercial Workers, plus yesterday's endorsement by the Teamsters. In total, the federation's member unions claim six-million members.

One of Obama's weaknesses in the earlier part of this cycle was a difficulty breaking through among blue-collar voters. But the situation has changed drastically with his recent wins in states like Maine and Wisconsin, and the new series of labor endorsements reflects just how much progress he's made and could very well continue to accomplish.

A new poll from Franklin & Marshall College shows the Pennsylvania primary race tightening already, with two months to go until the April 22 primary. Hillary Clinton led by 20 in the January poll, but her lead is now at 12 points:

Clinton 44% (+4)
Obama 32% (+12)

Hillary has the backing of the state party establishment here, led by Gov. Ed Rendell and Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter. If Obama's recent run of luck continues, though, he could definitely catch up — that is, if he hasn't clinched the nomination already.

The McCain camp has released a lengthy memo seeking to dispel any notion that John McCain acted improperly in writing to the FCC on behalf of Vicki Iseman's lobbying clients.

The memo says that McCain's work was consistent with his overall legislative record, continuing up to this day: "McCain has introduced some form of the legislation promoting the expansion of low power FM radio stations in the 106th, 107th, 108th, 109th and 110th Congressional sessions to show his continued support of media ownership diversity."

The full memo is available after the jump.

Read more »

John McCain's campaign released the following statement last night, in reaction to the New York Times story about his past association with lobbyist Vicki Iseman:

"It is a shame that the New York Times has lowered its standards to engage in a hit and run smear campaign. John McCain has a 24-year record of serving our country with honor and integrity. He has never violated the public trust, never done favors for special interests or lobbyists, and he will not allow a smear campaign to distract from the issues at stake in this election.

"Americans are sick and tired of this kind of gutter politics, and there is nothing in this story to suggest that John McCain has ever violated the principles that have guided his career."

McCain has a press conference scheduled for 9 a.m. ET.

The new pro-Hillary 527 that aims to raise big bucks for ads in Ohio and beyond will, it turns out, be disclosing its donors.

The American Leadership Project clarifies to me that because the group will be funding "electioneering communications" -- otherwise known as "ads" -- that run within 30 days of the voting, it will have to fully disclose its donors to the FEC in quarterly reports.

What's more, each time it spends $10,000 or more on an ad, it will have to file within 24 hours a report to the FEC that lists its donors of $1,000 or more. That will all be publicly accessible info.

"We intend to be open, transparent and to make all full and appropriate disclosures as required by the law," says ALP spokesperson Roger Salazar.

Which means that whatever efforts the group does undertake, its supporters won't be hidden by a shield of anonymity. The public will ultimately know who shelled out how much in an apparent effort to save Hillary's campaign in this fashion.

Hillary Clinton has this new ad running in Texas, aimed at the Latino community and asking people to vote early for "our friend." The ad is running in both English and Spanish. Here's the English version:

Interestingly, the ad doesn't talk about issues or tell the viewers anything compelling about Hillary — it's entirely about the logistical process of how to go vote for her. And on top of that it stars Henry Cisneros, who in 1999 pled guilty to a charge of lying to the FBI, and was then pardoned by Bill Clinton in January 2001.

(Via Ben Smith)

A source of mine tells me that an Obama fundraiser confided to him that the Obama campaign is on track to raise a startling sum in the month of February:

More than $36 million.

Obama raised $36 million in January, and given his victories and momentum, it makes sense that he'd be on track to exceed that and have his best month ever right now. An Obama spokesperson declined to comment.

Separately, here's another astonishing statistic: The campaign will soon report that it has enjoyed its millionth donor.

As I reported earlier today, the Obama camp quietly passed the half-million mark in donors for just this year. Now, in an email to supporters that just went out, the Obama campaign wrote:

"We've crunched all the numbers and discovered that we are within striking distance of something historic: one million people donating to this campaign...We're already more than 900,000 strong."

Today's Gallup tracking numbers give Barack Obama a five-point national lead over Hillary Clinton, up from the virtual tie in yesterday's results:

Obama 47% (+1)
Clinton 42% (-3)

There was some question as to whether Obama's numbers yesterday were being dragged down by the Hillary camp's plagiarism accusations. But with this strong recovery, it looks like it might have just been a statistical blip — and even if it wasn't, the publicity from his big Wisconsin win should make it a moot point.

Here's the first ad from the American Leadership Project, the new pro-Hillary 527 group operating in Ohio:

The ad tells viewers that they should look past mere rhetoric, and examine Hillary Clinton's great record on the economy. "If speeches could create jobs, we wouldn't be facing a recession," the announcer says. "But it takes more."

(Via Ben Smith)

Barack Obama is set to pick up the endorsement of another big union — none other than the Teamsters. Additionally, the Obama campaign announced in a press release that they've been endorsed by the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, who could further help provide some blue-collar credibility in Ohio.

Obama is continuing to make inroads with working-class voters — the exit polls from Wisconsin showed him winning union households 53%-44%, and winning 54%-44% among voters making under $50,000. More unions jumping on board certainly couldn't hurt his momentum in that department.