Barack Obama told reporters today in Pennsylvania that he was not involved in yesterday's call by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), a big supporter of his, that Hillary Clinton drop out of the race. "My attitude is that Senator Clinton can run as long as she wants. She is a fierce and formidable opponent, and she obviously believes she would make the best nominee and the best president."
Obama might be trying to dial back on the Hillary-should-drop notion that's been going around — such as in his own line yesterday that the Dem race is like a good movie that's gone on too long — perhaps because it could end up alienating voters in the remaining states.
Today is a big day in Texas: The Democratic district conventions, the second step in the caucus process. The district conventions will elect delegates to the state Democratic convention, which will in turn select the federal delegates.
The conventional wisdom going in is that Barack Obama will get enough projected delegates today to more than beat Hillary's four-delegate advantage from the state primary, thus crowning him the overall winner of the "prima-caucus" system. A clearer picture should emerge tonight, and we'll be updating when that happens.
Late Update: The latest numbers, with 31% of total delegates counted by Burnt Orange Report, stand at Obama 55%, Clinton 45%.
Late Late Update: With just under 40% of the delegate numbers in, it's Obama 58% to Clinton 42%.
Today's Gallup tracking poll shows Obama maintaining a statistically significant lead over Hillary Clinton. Here are the numbers, compared to yesterday:
Obama 50% (+0) Clinton 43% (+1)
And here are the general election match-ups, unchanged since yesterday:
Barack Obama publicly alluded to the various calls for the Democratic race to be over soon, telling a Pittsburgh crowd today that the Democratic race was like "a good movie that lasted about a half an hour too long."
This has got to be a dicey subject for the Obama camp. On the one hand, they presumably want their surrogates to keep attention focused on the notion that she should drop out. But on the other hand, if they get a little too loud about it then they risk alienating voters in those states that have yet to vote, especially Pennsylvania.
Late Update: Hillary has responded by declaring simply, "I like long movies."
The push-back against calls for Hillary to drop out begins in earnest from the Hillary side with this statement just out from Hillary supporter Ed Rendell:
“I respect Senator Leahy and like him very much but as the governor of one of America’s largest states, I am disappointed in his comments. By virtually every measure, this race is neck and neck with less than 1% of the more than 27 million votes cast forming the difference between the two candidates. To call for an end to this race before the people of Pennsylvania have had a chance to make their views known is wrong and a disservice to millions of Democrats.”
Casting calls for her to drop out as a slight to Pennsylvania voters, obviously. Clearly, the Obama campaign has to take care not to associate itself with any calls for her to get out because it would galvanize Hillary's core supporters and give Camp Hillary an opening to claim that the Obama camp is dissing Pennsylvania.
Leahy lays out his case that Barack Obama's delegate lead "appears to be insurmountable," and that dragging out the race is not good for the party, but acknowledges that she has every right to stay in...
"Senator Clinton has every right, but not a very good reason, to remain a candidate for as long as she wants to. As far as the delegate count and the interests of a Democratic victory in November go, there is not a very good reason for drawing this out. But as I have said before, that is a decision that only she can make."
“There was a poll the other day that said 22 percent of Democrats wanted me to drop out and 22 percent wanted Senator Obama to drop out,” Mrs. Clinton said. “And 62 percent said let people vote until we finally know what the outcome is!”
Asked on MSNBC moments ago about the calls coming from Obama supporters for Hillary to drop out of the race, Obama campaign national co-chair Bill Daley said...
"I don't think people should be calling on a candidate to drop out. The Clintons are smart people. I think it's very hard to see the numbers for them to pull this off..."
He added that eventually the Clintons would realize the game is over.
The Obama campaign doesn't want to be directly associated with demands that she leave the race right now, something that would politicize the calls for her to drop out and minimize the degree to which they're seen as being all about what's good for the party. Instead, the Obama campaign will hover above the fray while his surrogates -- and neutral parties -- do it for them.
Late Update: Here's video. Watching it again, I see that Daley does basically say that she'll be dropping out before the convention, which is as far as I've heard any Obama official go...
Barack Obama has a new ad in Indiana, a state widely believed to be an even bet between himself and Hillary Clinton. In the ad, Obama talks about how he'll work to fight plant closures and protect American jobs — a pitch clearly aimed at working-class white voters:
Obama is also on the air in North Carolina, which will vote along with Indiana on May 6, and where he's expected to come out on top:
Obama victories in both these two states would go a long way in forcing Hillary out, especially with Indiana not being viewed as automatic territory for either one of them — but the fact that he's already running these ads means he expects the contest to keep dragging on after Pennsylvania, where Hillary is expected to win on April 22.
This is intriguing -- the Hillary campaign is trying to fundraise off calls for her to get out of the race. In her latest fundraising email, Hillary writes:
Have you noticed the pattern?
Every time our campaign demonstrates its strength and resilience, people start to suggest we should end our pursuit of the Democratic nomination.
Those anxious to force us to the sidelines aren't doing it because they think we're going to lose the upcoming primaries. The fact is, they're reading the same polls we are, and they know we are in a position to win.
While snowballing calls for her to exit are the last thing Camp Hillary would want, her campaign will have to hope that they'll at least be able to use them to energize her most loyal supporters.
Today's Gallup tracking poll shows Barack Obama taking an eight-point lead over Hillary Clinton, beyond Gallup's three-point margin of error. Here are the numbers, compared to yesterday:
Obama 50% (+2) Clinton 42% (-2)
Late Update: From Gallup's analysis:
Obama clearly has weathered the Wright storm, while the dark clouds have shifted to Clinton over whether she has exaggerated her foreign policy credentials. This week she has had to defend her repeated claim that she came under sniper fire while visiting Bosnia as first lady, which news video clearly disputed.
Time magazine has an interesting look at precisely what Hillary is thinking right now, as she ponders the very difficult decision as to whether to continue the race in the face of very daunting odds:
Clinton is well aware of the long odds she faces in the battle against Barack Obama for delegates. She knows that as the Democratic National Convention gets closer, the increasingly bitter back and forth between the two campaigns hurts Obama's chances of winning a general election and reinforces the image of the Clintons as a power-hungry couple who will do anything to win, even if they damage the Democratic Party.
But for the Clintons, quitting isn't an option...When Clinton closes her eyes, she sees John McCain triumphing in November against Obama in a contest she believes she would win. Like all competitive candidates, Clinton is certain she would be a better leader than her rivals, and she feels an obligation to her supporters to fight on.
Clinton believes Obama's support is largely a mirage -- a bunch of true believers whose passion might help him cinch the nomination, but that may prove an insufficient bedrock for winning a general election when the spell might be broken by tough questions about national-security credentials, economic-policy plans and rich experience. She can't stop from shaking her head in disbelief when longtime friends who are elected officials inform her that they are going to endorse Obama and were chiefly convinced by their children's enthusiasm for his candidacy...
According to those close to her, she is hoping that as spring becomes summer, the potential for finding another skeleton or two in Obama's closet will prove him ultimately unelectable in the fall...
Said a confidant who has talked to her regularly throughout the campaign: "This woman never quits. Neither she nor her husband." So don't expect this race to end anytime soon.
Senator Patrick Leahy becomes the first prominent supporter of Obama to explicitly call on Hillary to get out of the race in an interview with Vermont Public Radio:
"There is no way that Senator Clinton is going to win enough delegates to get the nomination. She ought to withdraw and she ought to be backing Senator Obama. Now, obviously that's a decision that only she can make. Frankly I feel that she would have a tremendous career in the Senate."
Just yesterday, Chris Dodd, also an Obama backer, said something similar, suggesting that party leaders should come together in April and force an end to this.
So the big question now is whether we're about to see the calls for Hillary to leave the race start snowballing -- and whether that will make any difference.
For the first time, Howard Dean has publicly called on the Dem candidates to make sure that the race doesn't last all the way to the convention.
"There is no point in waiting," Dean said, adding that despite the newly-found superiority in Democratic organization over the Republicans, "that all doesn't make any difference if people are really disenchanted or demoralized by a convention that's really ugly and nasty."
Dean also said he has privately spoken to the candidates and their supporters when the attacks have gotten too rough: "The supporters should keep their mouths shut about this stuff on both sides because that is harmful to the potential victory of a Democrat."
Late Update: Dean is now calling upon super-delegates to make their decisions between now and July 1:
Speaking last night to volunteers in the Texas district conventions, Bill Clinton used perhaps the most blunt dismissal of caucus losses that we've yet seen — and seemingly setting up a scenario in which the Clinton campaign could lose even the aggregate popular vote, but justify battling on by way of only looking at the popular votes from primary states.
"Right now, among all the primary states, believe it or not, Hillary's only 16 votes behind in pledged delegates," said Bill, "and she's gonna wind up with the lead in the popular vote in the primary states. She's gonna wind up with the lead in the delegates."
During an appearance on The View set to air today, Barack Obama distanced himself from Jeremiah Wright in more explicit terms than he has until now, specifically saying that he would have left the church if not for Wright's retirement.
"Had the reverend not retired, and had he not acknowledged that what he had said had deeply offended people and were inappropriate and mischaracterized what I believe is the greatness of this country, for all its flaws, then I wouldn't have felt comfortable staying at the church," Obama said.
Late Update: Here's a YouTube of Obama's appearance:
Barack Obama is set to pick up a big endorsement today in Pennsylvania, that of Senator Bob Casey. With Hillary Clinton backed by almost the whole Democratic establishment in the state, Casey's support could potentially give Obama a decent leg up for the April 22 primary.
Also worth keeping in mind is that Casey had previously said he thought the best thing to do was remain publicly neutral — so his endorsement of Obama could potentially reflect a desire to end the primary race as soon as possible.
Here are the horse-race numbers from today's Pew Poll, as compared to the last poll from a month ago:
Obama 49% (+0) Clinton 39% (-1)
The top-line results are something of an outlier compared to other polls that are out there — they mostly have the race essentially tied — but it's interesting to see that Pew has no significant movement since Hillary Clinton's March 4 comeback, not after the hits Obama took from the Jeremiah Wright controversy.
Also bear in mind, this poll was conducted after Obama's speech on race relations, which was intended to repair much of the Wright damage — but before Hillary's recent Bosnia controversies.
"I'm not vetting my pastor," Obama told "The View." "I didn't have a research team during the course of 20 years to go pull every sermon he's given and see if there's something offensive that he's said."
Obama may not be willing to do this, but you can bet that the Republicans are already doing it quite diligently, thank you very much.
To be clear, that's not a criticism of Obama. Presuming this is true, it's another sign that he's just not willing to approach this problem in a conventional political fashion, and is willing to accept the liabilities that accompany this decision -- or is perhaps confident that he can talk his way out of them.
A new InsiderAdvantage poll of North Carolina gives Barack Obama a sizable lead here of 49%-34% over Hillary Clinton for the May 6 primary — a bad sign for Hillary, since she would basically need to run the table in the remaining contests in order to seriously narrow Obama's advantage in pledged delegates.
From the internals: Obama leads 79%-16% among black voters, while Hillary is ahead 47%-33% among whites.
Yesterday I flagged a new Gallup poll showing that 28% of Hillary supporters say they'll flip to McCain if Obama is the Dem nominee, while only 19% of Obama supporters would do so if Hillary won.
Today, Pew has some new numbers out with different findings -- while sizable numbers would desert either candidate for McCain, there's no real imbalance between the two sides:
Among Clinton's backers, 32% say they would vote for McCain if Obama is the Democratic nominee, and among Obama's backers, 28% say the same if Clinton wins the primary race.
Pew qualifies...
Many of these "defections" come from independent voters who only lean Democratic. When the analysis is limited to those who identify themselves as Democrats, just 20% of Obama supporters say they would not vote for Clinton in the fall, and 25% of Clinton supporters would not vote for Obama.
Yesterday a number of readers wrote in to say that it's far too early to worry about such numbers. There's no question that they are partly a product of temporary circumstances -- lack of aggressive coverage of McCain; intense media scrutiny of both Dems; and the white-hot acrimony between the two Dem campaigns and some of their supporters.
Still, anyone who wants to see a Dem in the Oval Office in 2008 would be remiss for not viewing these figures with some concern.
Separately, the poll has tons of other interesting stuff -- it finds that Obama has basically weathered the Wright storm, though it also finds that persistently large numbers still wrongly believe he's a Muslim. Have at it.
After reviewing some of the comments the Clinton team made about the Pelosi letter on the conference call today, I realize I was remiss in not flagging another part of it: While Hillary advisers did say they didn't know what was in the letter until it was made public, they also declined to disavow the threatening aspect of it.
Asked on the call by The Huffington Post's Sam Stein whether the suggestion that the donors might withhold funds from the DCCC was "appropriate," Hillary spokesperson Phil Singer said:
"I think the letter speaks for itself. There's clearly a broad feeling among many Democrats, many people who are active in the party, that the role of superdelegates is to exercise independent judgment and make a decision based on what is best for the party and best for the country."
Singer seemed to be addressing the substance of the letter's argument about super-dels here, but nonetheless, he was directly asked whether the tacit threat was "appropriate," and didn't use the occasion to condemn it or disagree with it.
A bit later on the call, Hillary spokesperson Howard Wolfson said that folks with questions about this should pose them directly to the donors themselves and didn't directly disavow that aspect of the letter. He did add, however, that people at "every level" of the campaign "are absolutely committed" to "doing what we can to help create large Democratic majorities in 2008."
That letter to Nancy Pelosi from 20 Hillary fundraisers contained a veiled threat: Change your public posture on the role of the super-dels or you might see our money stop flowing into DCCC coffers.
The question now is: Did Hillary or any of her campaign officials participate in the writing of the letter or sign off on its content? Did she or the campaign approve a message tacitly threatening to dial back a commitment to building a lasting Democratic majority?
The Hillary campaign -- and one fundraiser who signed the letter -- say that the answer is an emphatic No.
"We got a heads up that it was being sent, and that was it," Hillary spokesperson Phil Singer said on a conference call with reporters moments ago. He also said: "We didn't know what was in it. Our supporters let us know that they were sending something."
Separately, one of the signatories of the letter -- someone I trust -- tells me that the letter was not written in consultation with the campaign. You all will make of this what you will, but that's what the person said.
As Josh noted last night, many of you readers have been writing in to say that the new NBC/WSJ poll oversampled African Americans in measuring voter reaction to the Wright controversy.
Now the pollster who did the poll has produced a new memo discussing the question and clarifying why it is that African Americans are not over-represented in their national sample.
Here, buried in this week's NBC/Wall Street Journal poll of registered, are some interesting numbers on the question of how Democrats would react if the super-delegates delivered the nomination to the candidate that isn't leading in the pledged-del count:
If One of the candidates loses among delegates selected by voters but still wins the nomination by winning among superdelegates, would you consider that nominee legitimate, would you consider that nominee NOT legitmate, or do you not have an opinion either way?
Would consider nominee legitimate 29%
Would consider nominee NOT legitimate 38%
No opinion either way 28%
My bet is that these numbers would shift dramatically, probably more towards Obama, if this were to suddenly loom as a real possibility and focus public attention on the argument over it.
This is a bit late, but here's the response from a Pelosi spokesperson to the letter from Clinton fundraisers demanding that she back off her position that the super-dels should support the winner if the pledged del count:
“Speaker Pelosi is confident that superdelegates will choose between Senators Clinton or Obama -- our two strong candidates -- before the convention in August. That choice will be based on many considerations, including respecting the decisions of millions of Americans who have voted in primaries and participated in caucuses. The Speaker believes it would do great harm to the Democratic Party if superdelegates are perceived to overturn the will of the voters. This has been her position throughout this primary season, regardless of who was ahead at any particular point in delegates or votes.”
This is close to Obama's position, but not identical to it. On the one hand, she's agreeing with Obama's assertion that going against the voters would damage the party.
But at the same time, she is also allowing for super-dels to base their choice on "many considerations," which is a departure from the Obama position that ultimately the only thing guiding their choice should be the pledged del count. In short, this reflects what appear to be Pelosi's efforts to appear neutral while tacitly supporting the Obama position.
In Obama's favor, also note that she's basically calling for the race to end before the convention.
We have the full text of Obama's big speech on the economy, after the jump.
In the speech, Obama criticizes the deregulation of the 1990s and the status quo of this decade as a poor alternative to what he says should have been done, replacing obsolete regulatory orders with modernized approaches. In the end, Obama stresses that government institutions that offer a safety net for the finance sector, such as the Federal Reserve, have to be balanced by businesses being accountable to the government that is ready to bail them out if something goes wrong.
Obama also takes aim at John McCain, a clear indication that he's ready to shift gears and take on McCain for the general election:
After months of inaction, the President spoke here in New York and warned against doing too much. His main proposal – extending tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans – is completely divorced from the reality that people are facing around the country. John McCain recently announced his own plan, and it amounts to little more than watching this crisis happen. While this is consistent with Senator McCain’s determination to run for George Bush’s third term, it won’t help families who are suffering, and it won’t help lift our economy out of recession.
The word "Clinton" does not occur once in the prepared remarks.
Barack Obama said last night that it would be better for the potential Democratic nominee to be able to shift into the general election, instead of letting a divisive primary last for months longer.
"I think giving whoever the nominee is two or three months to pivot into the general election would be extremely helpful, instead of having this drag up to the convention," Obama told reporters on board his plane.
It's possibly the closest he has come to openly wishing Hillary Clinton would drop out of the race, and perhaps even a nod-and-wink appeal to uncommitted super-delegates who might prefer that the race be over sooner rather than later.
Some cracks are starting to show in the dedication of Hillary Clinton super-delegates in Washington State, with some fearing that the drawn-out contest would damage the party for the general election.
"I don't think that people want a divisive, explosive convention," said King County Executive Ron Sims, a super-delegate supporting Hillary. "It will radiate defeat."
Another Hillary supporter, Sen. Maria Cantwell, declared earlier this week that "I definitely don’t want the super-delegates to be the deciding factor," and that the party should eventually come together around the candidate who has won the most delegates and most states.
Hillary Clinton said in a Fox News interview shown last night that the flap over her trip to Bosnia, and previous statements that she had come under sniper fire, are not what voters want to be talking about.
"I'm a human being. I made a mistake and owned up to it," Hillary told Greta Van Susteren. "But that's not what people talk to me about. When I'm out campaigning ... people want to talk about the economy and health care, and they want to know what are you going to do to get fix our country and get it back on track, and help my family and me.
"And that what I'm really engaged in. Because, you know, when you've been on a campaign for 14 months there's all kinds of other distractions, but at the end of the day this is a hiring decision."
Barack Obama is scheduled to give a big speech on the economy at 9:15 a.m. ET today, a push by his campaign to compete effectively on some of the bread-and-butter issues where Hillary Clinton has been shown to be ahead of him in many polls.
And here's a detail that should get a lot of attention: Obama will be introduced by none other than New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg. It could get a lot of people asking if Bloomberg will be supporting Obama, now that he's completely ruled out any presidential aspirations of his own.
From the internals: Obama wins independents 45%-38% over McCain, while McCain wins independents 48%-36% against Hillary.
Obama narrowly won the Connecticut primary on Super Tuesday, and has since picked up the endorsement of Sen. Chris Dodd — while John McCain is of course supported by the state's other Senator, Joe Lieberman.
The new NBC/WSJ survey has some interesting new polling of registered voters on the Wright controversy, finding that it's been a mixed bag for Obama:
On that issue specifically, 32% of folks said he "sufficiently addressed the issue," while 26% of those folks believe he needs to address the Wright controversy further; 31% of voters surveyed did not see the speech or had no opinion. Interestingly, of those voters who said they saw the speech, 47% said Obama sufficiently addressed the Wright issue while 37% said he needs to address it further. Among whites, 45% were satisfied with Obama's explanation, 38% were not; Among blacks, 67% said the speech was sufficient while 25% want him to address it further.
But...
Overall, 55% of voters told us that they were "disturbed" by the Rev. Jeremiah Wright videos that circulated so widely on cable TV and the Internet.
Obama's numbers did fall slightly among Republicans, but he remains considerably more competitive among independents than Hillary does.
And while his positive rating fell only slightly in the past two weeks, to 49%, Hillary's fell further, dropping down to 37%, its lowest in this poll since March of 2001.
Meanwhile, in the national match-up, the two are tied at 45%.
Obama spokesperson Bill Burton responds to the letter from top Clinton fundraisers demanding that Nancy Pelosi say publicly that super-dels shouldn't feel bound to support the pledged del count leader...
“This letter is inappropriate and we hope the Clinton campaign will reject the insinuation contained in it. Regardless of the outcome of the nomination fight, Senator Obama will continue to urge his supporters to assist Speaker Pelosi in her efforts to maintain and build a working majority in the House of Representatives.”
The "insinuation" Burton refers to here is the following line from the letter, which links the donors' reference to their own financial support of the DCCC to their demand that Pelosi publicly declare that the super-dels should feel free to be "independent" in their choice:
We have been strong supporters of the DCCC. We therefore urge you to clarify your position on super-delegates and reflect in your comments a more open view to the optional independent actions of each of the delegates at the National Convention in August.
That's what Burton's responding to by saying that Obama, for his part, "will continue to urge his supporters to assist Speaker Pelosi in her efforts to maintain and build a working majority in the House of Representatives."
Meanwhile, Joe Sudbay of Americablog has a very good catch: He points out that in the above line, the fundraisers appear to be urging her to declare that the delegates in general should feel free to make an independent choice -- meaning not just the supers but the pledged dels, too.
The Hillary campaign, which has seen its hopes for a state-run revote effectively dashed by opposition from Obama and local officials, has just called for a party-run primary -- or "firehouse primary" -- and challenged the Obama camp to climb aboard.
The Hillary camp's call for the new vote comes in the wake of a decision by a Federal judge in Detroit today ruling the state's presidential primary law unconstitutional.
The Clinton camp is basing the release of its proposal on the argument that the ruling throws into question the constitutionality of Michigan's entire election code and therefore the validity of the primary results, although the court specifically ruled it's decision did not go that far.
From Hillary campaign manager Maggie Williams...
In the wake of today's court ruling regarding Michigan’s January 15th primary, we urge Senator Obama to join our call for a party-run primary and demonstrate his commitment to counting Michigan's votes.
The Hillary camp's full statement after the jump. We'll bring you Obama's answer when we get it.
Meet the GOP candidates for Senate in New Jersey. They're quite a colorful bunch.
One of the most frustrating Senate races for the Republicans this cycle has to be New Jersey, where the GOP has been struggling to recruit a candidate who isn't unhealthy, a boozer, a crank, or an out-and-out loon.
A recent Quinnipiac poll gave Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D) only a 39% approval rating to 31% disapproval, with only 32% saying he deserves to be re-elected, and a solid 58% saying he is too old. On paper, he would seem to be vulnerable.
The problem is, New Jersey is very much a Democratic state, and the state GOP is a mess. With unpopular Democrats routinely getting re-elected over lackluster or even decent Republican nominees, the Republicans need a very good candidate to win.
And they don't appear to have one — far from it, in fact. Meet the GOP candidates, after the jump.
Twenty top Hillary fundraisers and donors have sent a scathing private letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, chastising her for publicly saying that the super-delegates should support the winner of the pledged delegate count and demanding that she say that they should make an "independent" choice.
I've obtained a copy of the letter, which comes from some of the most influential fundraisers in the Democratic Party, including Hassan Nemazee, Steven Rattner, Maureen White, Stan Shuman, and Alan Patricof.
Here's a key excerpt:
Several states and millions of Democratic voters have not yet had a chance to cast their votes.
We respect those voters and believe that they, like the voters in the states that have already participated, have a right to be heard. None of us should make declarative statements that diminish the importance of their voices and their votes. We are writing to say we believe your remarks on ABC News This Week on March 16th did just that.
During your appearance, you suggested super-delegates have an obligation to support the candidate who leads in the pledged delegate count as of June 3rd , whether that lead be by 500 delegates or 2. This is an untenable position that runs counter to the party’s intent in establishing super-delegates in 1984 as well as your own comments recorded in The Hill ten days earlier...
The letter also contains an explicit reference to the fact that these donors have contributed heavily to Democratic causes, and demands that Pelosi clarify that the role of the super-dels is to make an "independent" choice between the candidates:
We have been strong supporters of the DCCC. We therefore urge you to clarify your position on super-delegates and reflect in your comments a more open view to the optional independent actions of each of the delegates at the National Convention in August. We appreciate your activities in support of the Democratic Party and your leadership role in the Party and hope you will be responsive to some of your major enthusiastic supporters.
The letter represents a significant ratcheting up of pressure from Hillary's big money people on a Democratic leader in a position to influence how the super-delegates make up their minds at the end of the primary.
"I don't think any of these people oughta be asked to resign," he said. "All these guys that say bad things about any other campaign, they say, 'Should they resign?' My answer is no; they're repeating party line. They oughta stay right where they are. Let's just saddle up and have an argument. What's the matter with that? That's what America's about, right?"
Presumably that includes Samantha Power, right?
Either way, this isn't all that easy a call, when it comes down to it. On the one hand, you can't have aides out there saying anything they want; you expect a campaign to take action against certain offenses, such as the spreading of the false Obama Muslim smear email.
On the other hand, of course, the campaigns often absolutely love it when someone on the other side says something that allegedly offends them and gives them an excuse to shift into high dudgeon. This unspoken truth drives much of our campaign news -- yet everyone has agreed to pretend it isn't the case.
Here's the full text of John McCain's big speech on foreign policy today.
While he advocates hawkish stances on both Iraq and Iran, in many other ways the speech is an attempt by McCain to distance himself from President Bush's unilateral approach to foreign policy — a political imperative for McCain, as he heads into a general election at a time when Bush's approval numbers are in the toilet and the Iraq War remains extremely unpopular.
Here's one key quote:
Recall the words of our founders in the Declaration of Independence, that we pay "decent respect to the opinions of mankind." Our great power does not mean we can do whatever we want whenever we want, nor should we assume we have all the wisdom and knowledge necessary to succeed. We need to listen to the views and respect the collective will of our democratic allies. When we believe international action is necessary, whether military, economic, or diplomatic, we will try to persuade our friends that we are right. But we, in return, must be willing to be persuaded by them.
It's a very difficult balancing act that McCain will apparently be trying to accomplish: Simultaneously campaigning for many of President Bush's policies, and against much of Bush's overall approach and leadership style.
Full speech after the jump.
Late Update: The Huffington Post's Sam Stein points out that McCain's speech lifts a chunk almost verbatim from an op-ed he wrote back in 2001, drumming up support for the Afghanistan War.
This, from Gallup, is the first polling I've seen on this question -- it finds that Hillary supporters say they're more likely to bolt to McCain if their choice doesn't end up as the nominee:
Clinton supporters appear to be somewhat more reactive than Obama supporters. Twenty-eight percent of the former indicate that if Clinton is not the nominee -- and Obama is -- they would support McCain. That compares to 19% of Obama supporters who would support McCain if Obama is not the nominee -- and Clinton is.
You hear lots more media attention being paid to the idea that Obama's supporters would bolt to McCain than to the possibility that Hillary's would. It's worth keeping in mind that you can't take it for granted, as some pundits seem to, that Hillary backers will all support Obama.
On the other hand, one problem with this poll is it doesn't account for how Hillary might win. If Obama won the pledged delegate count and popular vote, and the super dels put Hillary over the top, you could easily see the number of Obama supporters not willing to back Hillary spiking.
CLINTON: Well, first I think that it's important to point out that the premise of the whole discussion that some people are engaged in is off base because this is a very close race...
I've won states that Democrats need to win in the general election in order to win the White House and obviously the strategy on the other side is to try to shut this race down, but I don't think voters want that. You know, there was a big surge in registration here in Pennsylvania. That seems to be happening in other states that are in the upcoming contests. Millions of people still remain to vote and to have their votes counted, so I think it's exciting and I find it very positive for our party. We're going to bring a lot of people into this race.
It is true that Obama campaign manager David Plouffe has repeatedly suggested to reporters that she can't catch him and that there should be a "sober" (his word) evaluation of her chances. But to my knowledge, no one in the Obama camp has ever publicly said the race should end.
Either way, it's interesting that Hillary went so far and is readying herself for a debate over whether the race should continue.
Also, Hillary's assertion that continuing the contest could be good for the party could prove a tough sell, at least to party insiders, some of whom are worried that a drawn-out and increasingly bitter contest could could do far more harm to the party than good.
In an interview with Mark Halperin, Hillary Clinton again put out the idea that pledged delegates do not have to stick with the candidate they were elected to back: "We talk a lot about so-called pledged delegates, but every delegate is expected to exercise independent judgment."
Hillary spokesman Phil Singer told reporters yesterday that such a statement of the rules is "not a cause for hysteria," and denied having any plans to try and recruit Barack Obama's delegates, while campaign strategist Harold Ickes was much more equivocal on the subject.
The brutality of the Democratic race could be having an effect here: Barack Obama's favorable rating is at only 47%, Hillary's at 45% — and John McCain's at 59%.
Gov. Phil Bredesen (D-TN) is growing more outspoken in his calls for a super-delegate meeting in June, so as to sew up the Democratic race before the convention and avoid a bloody Summer — and one comment in particular seems inclined towards supporting Barack Obama.
Bredesen said the super-delegates should not overturn the results of the primaries and caucuses. If such a thing were to occur, Bredesen warned, "There would be hell to pay in the party for a long time to come."
Late Update: It's not entirely clear whether Bredesen was referring to the pledged delegates or the aggregate popular vote as his preferred metric for this scenario. It's also worth pointing out that Bredesen has not publicly endorsed either of the Dem candidates.
Barack Obama has been trying to put the Jeremiah Wright controversy behind him, but Wright himself is having some trouble doing the same — thanks to the media limelight he's faced, he's now had to cancel two separate, high-profile speaking engagements.
A Wright speech planned for last night in Tampa was axed, plus another event for this Sunday in Houston. In the case of the Houston appearance, security concerns were openly cited as the reason for the cancellation.
John McCain is set to deliver a big speech today on foreign policy, which in many ways looks like it will be a not-too-subtle denunciation of President Bush's romanticization of war at the same as McCain sets out to continue many of Bush's bottom-line policies. McCain will call for greater cooperation with allies, and will even go so far as to say, "I detest war."
"Only a fool or a fraud sentimentalizes the merciless reality of war," he will say. "However heady the appeal of a call to arms, however just the cause, we should still shed a tear for all that is lost when war claims its wages from us."
In a further sign that the Senate Republicans face a severe lack of confidence in regaining control of the Senate, The Hill reports that many GOP Senators have given little or nothing from their campaign accounts over to the National Republican Senatorial Committee — with a total of eight GOP Senators having given absolutely nothing.
By contrast, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has had much greater luck collecting cash from its members — even Joe Lieberman kicked in $100,000 for the Senate Dems this past December.
Emily's List, the high-profile PAC with a mission statement of election pro-choice Democratic women, has announced a big campaign targeting up to 150,000 women in the southeastern region of Pennsylvania, the state where Hillary Clinton needs a huge win to restore her credibility.
One of Hillary's most reliable bases of support has been suburban white women, and there are plenty of them to be found in the greater Philadelphia area. No dollar amount has bee put the Emily's List drive yet, but it will consist of mailers and phone calls.
Late Update: It's worth remembering that Barack Obama will have his own help in Pennsylvania, in the form of a ground game from SEIU.
At the presser today, Hillary answers multiple questions about Wright, reiterating -- and amplifying -- her suggestion that Obama should have left Wright's church...
A couple quick things. Note how tightly Hillary stuck to the line, "I was asked what I would do," a rhetorical device designed to maintain that this isn't really a negative attack on Obama. Indeed, at one point, she made this explicit, saying:
"When asked a direct question, I gave a direct answer. And I feel very comfortable with that. I don't think that's negative. That's what I would have done."
Also, note that Hillary appears to be reading much of her material on the Wright questions, suggesting that real care went into working out precisely how she'd deal with the issue.
Late Update: Obama spokesperson Bill Burton responds:
“After originally refusing to play politics with this issue, it’s disappointing to see Hillary Clinton’s campaign sink to this low in a transparent effort to distract attention away from the story she made up about dodging sniper fire in Bosnia. The truth is, Barack Obama has already spoken out against his pastor’s offensive comments and addressed the issue of race in America with a deeply personal and uncommonly honest speech. The American people deserve better than tired political games that do nothing to solve the larger challenges facing this country."
Hillary, at a press conference just now, concedes error on the whole Bosnia-sniper flap...
I just made a mistake. I had a different memory. My staff and others have all come together trying to sort out -- so I made a mistake. That happens. It proves I'm human, which for some is a revelation.
Also: In the wake of the Obama campaign releasing his tax returns today, Hillary now said at the presser that she hopes to release hers sometime next week.
More on the presser soon, including remarks she made about Wright.
The Wright Stuff is coming fast and furious from Hillary and her supporters.
First Hillary criticized Obama today for not sufficiently distancing himself from the controversial pastor.
I've now learned that a member of Hillary's finance committee and a longtime ally of the Clintons has made some very explicit statements about Barack Obama's ties to his controversial minister, Jeremiah Wright, saying that it's "legitimate" to raise questions about those ties, comparing Wright to David Duke, and claiming that Obama has "used race where it suited him."
The finance committee member, Niall O'Dowd, made the comments on Saturday in an unnoticed interview with RTE Radio in Ireland. The Wright issue has been raised by Hillary surrogates Lanny Davis and Joe Wilson, making O'Dowd the third Hillaryite (or fourth, if you include Hillary herself) to hit Obama over Wright.
The interview is worth a listen, because it's another example of supporters of the candidates (see Power, Samantha) getting themselves in potential trouble by saying things abroad in settings where more candor is possible, and indeed expected, than here in America...
The comments from O'Dowd -- who's long been close to both Clintons, having served as a key adviser on Irish affairs to Bill Clinton and hosting a big fundraiser for Hillary last year -- go farther on Wright than Hillary and her supporters have thus far.
O'Dowd said that the Wright comments raised "a legitimate question" and observed that "it's interesting that Barack Obama sat in the pews while all this was going on, and never once in any of his books or anything else" did he denounce Wright, adding: "He worshipped this man."
O'Dowd also compared Wright to Duke and inadvertently said that the Hillary campaign is actively making an issue of the Wright controversy, something the campaign (Hillary's comments today notwithstanding) has been careful to avoid doing. O'Dowd said:
"I think the issue that the Clinton campaign has seized on is that Barack Obama, you know, never once raised his voice to his pastor and said, `I think your language is quite extreme here, and I think you language is probably wrong.' Because let's turn this around. If this was David Duke and he was preaching on behalf of, and Hillary Clinton was in the pew, there would be outrage about this. And there can't be this double standard. Barack Obama has used race where it suited him, but when it doesn't suit him he backs away from it."
A new Public Policy Polling (D) survey of North Carolina shows that Barack Obama has jumped into an enormous lead over Hillary Clinton, after having been in a dead heat during the worst of the Jeremiah Wright controversy.
Here are the numbers, compared to their previous poll from just last week:
Obama 55% (+11) Clinton 34% (-9)
From the internals: Obama leads 80%-14% among black voters, while Hillary has a narrow 47%-40% lead among whites.
With Hillary Clinton facing a big gap in pledged delegates, she now needs to win practically all the remaining contests in order to damage Obama's public standing and justify a super-delegate win — and this poll isn't good news for her. For Obama's part, a huge net delegate win here could potentially make up for just about all the expected Hillary gains from Pennsylvania.
Late Update: One other factor in the wild swing for this poll could be that PPP has altered their methodology to a higher-turnout model than their last North Carolina poll. The same model was used for some other primary polls this season, and in those cases the numbers were relatively close to the final results.
Okay, here we go. In an interview today with reporters and editors of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Hillary made what I think are her first extensive critical remarks about the Jeremiah Wright controversy, suggesting that Obama should have moved to another church in response to Wright's comments...
"He would not have been my pastor," Clinton said. "You don't choose your family, but you choose what church you want to attend."...
The Clinton campaign has refrained from getting involved in the controversy, but Clinton herself, responding to a question, denounced what she said was "hate speech."
"You know, I spoke out against Don Imus (who was fired from his radio and television shows after making racially insensitive remarks), saying that hate speech was unacceptable in any setting, and I believe that," Clinton said. "I just think you have to speak out against that. You certainly have to do that, if not explicitly, then implicitly by getting up and moving."
That is an implicit criticism of Obama for not "speaking out" or "moving" churches in response to revelations about Wright's views. Obama, however, has spoken out against Wright, denouncing his more controversial views in multiple interviews and in his big speech on race relations, though he has not disavowed the church.
Hillary made the comments in a newspaper in blue-collar-voter-rich Pennsylvania, where she needs a big win on April 22nd to keep her electoral hopes alive. The Tribune-Review says that some of what Hillary said was in response to a question. We'll bring you video or a transcript as soon as we can.
A new Rasmussen poll of Pennsylvania shows that the sheer bitterness of the Democratic race could spell trouble for the party down the road in this key big swing state.
The poll shows that the divisive Democratic primary is dragging down the prospects for party unity, at least for now: Only 55% of Clinton supporters say they are even just somewhat likely to back Obama if he's the nominee, and the same goes for only 55% of Obama supporters if Hillary is the nominee.
Here are the horse-race numbers compared to the previous poll from about two weeks ago:
In pure political terms, this will obviously give more political potency to the Obama camp's efforts to make Hillary's failure to release her returns a key issue in the campaign. The Obama camp is now free to beat this drum between now and mid-April, when the Hillary camp has promised to release hers.
Indeed, the Obama campaign is already calling on Hillary to follow suit. “Senator Clinton can’t claim to be vetted until she allows the public the opportunity to see her finances," Obama spokesperson Robert Gibbs says, in a reference to the Hillary camp's frequent claim that Obama has not been thoroughly "vetted" in advance of the general election.
The Hillary campaign, which is effectively in the red, has been asking donors for cash so she can go up on the air in Pennsylvania. Now she's going up in the state with this straightforward spot on the economy and standing up to special interests, a pitch for Pennsylvania's sizable population of blue collar and lower middle class whites.
It's one of her core constituencies, and if it doesn't deliver for her in a big way on April 22, the race could effectively be over...
The ad also ran in Ohio, an effort to appeal to a similar constituency there.
During a conference call just now with reporters, Clinton adviser Harold Ickes fell short of denying that Hillary Clinton would pursue efforts to convert pledged delegates for Barack Obama over to her side, as she said yesterday is possible under the rules.
"I think what Mrs. Clinton was trying to make clear is that no delegate is required by party rules to vote for the candidate for which they're pledged," Ickes said. "Now obviously circumstances can change, and people's minds can change about the viability of a particular candidate, and that's permitted under our rules ever since the 1980 convention."
Campaign spokesman Phil Singer then jumped in to dial back any impression that the campaign would be attempting this: "It is still our position that we are not asking pledged delegates for Sen. Obama to flip over. That is a rule, but we are not engaged in any efforts, so please don't make a mistake about that."
Singer added later in the call, "I know there's always a temptation to read something into everything, but simply stating a fact is not a cause for hysteria."
The New York Times lays out the roadmap for a Hillary nomination despite her apparently insurmountable gap in the pledged delegates, involving overwhelming victories in the remaining primaries and a severe drop in Barack Obama's poll numbers in order to justify a nomination via supers.
In summary: "Mrs. Clinton's best hope now is that Mr. Obama, as a candidate, suffers a political collapse akin to what has happened to the subprime mortgage market, a view shared by aides in both campaigns." However, even this strategy might have been stymied by the relatively good reception to Obama's speech on race relations, and the subsequent endorsement from Bill Richardson.
Democratic registration in Pennsylvania set a new record yesterday, at the close of yesterday's deadline to register for the state's closed primary.
Over 4 million Pennsylvanians are now registered as Democrats, out of 8.2 million total registered voters. Republican and independent registrations both shrank slightly — a possible sign of crossover voters for Barack Obama — while 120,000 previously unregistered people entered the rolls.
Whereas most states left on the primary calendar seem to clearly lean one way or the other between Obama and Clinton, Indiana is now emerging as the true swing state for their May 6 contest.
On the one hand Hillary Clinton has the enthusiastic backing of Sen. Evan Bayh, while on the other hand Barack Obama should expect to run very well in places like Indianapolis and parts of the state served by Illinois media markets. "If I had to pick — and I'm not usually shy about saying who's going to win — I couldn't tell you today," said freshman Rep. Joe Donnelly, who is currently neutral in the race.
John McCain is set to give a big speech today in Los Angeles about the mortgage crisis, in which he will propose ... well, not much. McCain is not set to actually pitch any specifics, but still simply be laying out some background principles such as: "I will evaluate everything in terms of whether it might be harmful or helpful to our effort to deal with the crisis we face now."
One thing McCain will say, according to the prepared remarks, is that he wants to convene a meeting of mortgage lenders, and ask them to help: "They’ve been asking the government to help them out. I’m now calling upon them to help their customers, and their nation out. It’s time to help American families."
The New York Times notes this morning that John McCain has missed more than half the votes in the Senate since January 2007, between campaigning and touring the world in order to look presidential — a statistic that could potentially be exploited against his claims of being the most qualified leader.
McCain's 56% absentee numbers aren't as bad as John Kerry, who missed 72% of votes for the 2003-2004 cycle, but they are definitely the worst for the three remaining presidential candidates — Barack Obama has missed 37% of votes, and Hillary Clinton 27%.
During an interview with the Philadelphia Daily News editorial board, Hillary Clinton again pitched the idea that she can close the gap in the pledged delegate count — by pointing out that pledged delegates can always switch their votes.
"And also remember that pledged delegates in most states are not pledged," said Clinton. "You know, there is no requirement that anybody vote for anybody. They’re just like super-delegates."
Hillary previously hinted at such a strategy about two weeks ago, while over a month ago the campaign had to deny reports that they would attempt such a thing.
Hillary has now weighed in on the flap over her statements about coming under sniper fire when visiting Bosnia in 1996 -- and she's conceding that she got it wrong.
She gave an interview to the Philadelphia Daily News editorial board today that was captured by Will Bunch, and here's what she had to say about it:
"Now let me tell you what I can remember, OK -- because what I was told was that we had to land a certain way and move quickly because of the threat of sniper fire. So I misspoke -- I didn't say that in my book or other times but if I said something that made it seem as though there was actual fire -- that's not I was told. I was told we had to land a certain way, we had to have our bulletproof stuff on because of the threat of sniper fire. I was also told that the greeting ceremony had been moved away from the tarmac but that there was this 8-year-old girl and, I can't, I can't rush by her, I've got to at least greet her -- so I made a -- I took her stuff and then I left, Now that's my memory of it."
Hillary's quotes here echo her spokesperson's admission today. Bunch than asked whether this admission should call Hillary's credibility on foreign policy. Hillary's reply:
"No, I went to 80 countries, you know. I gave contemporaneous accounts, I wrote about a lot of this in my book. you know, I think that, a minor blip, you know, if I said something that, you know, I say a lot of things -- millions of words a day -- so if I misspoke, that was just a mistatement."
As we've seen again and again in this race, it's striking how quickly, and unabashedly, the campaigns have converted expressions of grievance about alleged slights into appeals for money -- as if there's no need for the campaigns to even hide the delight lurking within their outrage.
The Hillary campaign, for instance, has already blasted out an appeal to donors that highlights Obama supporter General McPeak's suggested comparison of Bill Clinton with Joe McCarthy.
"Do you think Bill Clinton is like Joe McCarthy?" writes top Hillary adviser Terry McAuliffe in the email, which was sent our way. "Of course you don't. Neither do I. But Barack Obama must because this past weekend, his campaign compared President Clinton to Joe McCarthy. Joe McCarthy!"
Such appeals also reflect the fact that, as noted here last week, the Hillary campaign basically is in the red right now, while Obama has roughly $30 million on hand for the primary.
The main spectacle in the presidential race today was the sight of Bill Clinton re-emerging with a vengeance as a major issue in the campaign.
After a months-long lull, during which Bill had reverted to a more supporting role in the campaign, he's suddenly back at the center of the action. Only this time, it's with a twist: Whereas in the runup to South Carolina the Hillary team was mostly fending off criticism of multiple Bill slip-ups, the Hillary campaign is now partly responsible for driving his re-emergence.
Hillary advisers are actively highlighting various criticisms of Bill by Obama surrogates in order to argue that Camp Obama is running a fiercely negative campaign that falls short of Obama's lofty promises of a new politics.
Another key moment from the Hillary campaign conference call: Hillary spokesperson Howard Wolfson acknowledged that she "misspoke" when she claimed a couple of weeks ago that as First Lady she had to avoid sniper fire in Bosnia in 1996.
“I certainly do remember that trip to Bosnia, and as Togo said, there was a saying around the White House that if a place was too small, too poor, or too dangerous, the president couldn’t go, so send the First Lady. That’s where we went. I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base.”
Questioned about this on the call, Wolfson repeatedly said that contemporaneous news accounts said that there were "snipers in the hills" in the area. He also read from Hillary's book, Living History, saying that she also described the danger in similar terms.
However, in so doing, Wolfson did concede that her particular description of the episode might not have been accurate, saying:
“It is possible in the most recent instance in which she discussed this that she misspoke in regard to the exit from the plane, but there is no question if you look at contemporaneous accounts that she was going to a potential combat zone, that she was on the front lines.”
As it turns out, though, Hillary used a similar description a second time, two weeks before the above example, when touting her alleged commander-in-chief advantage over Obama. At an event rolling out the "red phone" ad, she said that upon arrival in Bosnia, the welcoming ceremony “had to be moved inside because of sniper fire.”
The mention of "sniper fire" here is also a stretch from her own earlier accounts of the event in Living History, when she said merely that the event was cut short due merely to reports of snipers in the hills around the airstrip.
It turns out reporters will have enough time to take a hard look at Hillary's tax returns in the run-up to the Pennsylvania primary.
The Obama campaign has been hitting Hillary regularly for "secrecy" over the fact that she has yet to release the returns. And asked on a conference call with reporters whether the campaign would pledge to release the returns at least three days before the primary, Hillary spokesperson Howard Wolfson said:
"Yes. That is a categorical yes."
It's still possible that this won't leave enough time for any revelations therein to sink in with the Pennsylvania electorate, of course.
Obama is out with a statement on the death of the 4,000th American in Iraq...
"It is with great sadness that we have reached another grim milestone in Iraq, with at least 4,000 of our finest Americans having been killed. Each death is a tragedy, and we honor every fallen American and send our thoughts and prayers to their families. It is past time to end this war that should never have been waged by bringing our troops home, and finally pushing Iraq's leaders to take responsibility for their future. As we do, we must serve the memory of all who have died as well as they served our country, by providing support for their families, caring for our troops and veterans, and upholding the American values which our fallen heroes exemplified through their service."
It's interesting to note that in this statement, Obama describes the war as something that "should never have been waged," but he stops short of adding that the war "should never have been authorized," a formulation he frequently uses that implicitly criticizes Hillary's vote for the war.
In other words, Obama is quite properly refraining from injecting even the merest trace of politics into his reaction to this grim milestone.
Hillary Clinton gave her big speech on the mortgage crisis today in Philadelphia, laying out various proposals for restructuring debts, an important issue to many blue-collar voters in this key primary — a state where a loss would effectively end her candidacy, and where even no less than a resounding win would be necessary for her to be credible for the nomination.
Beyond that, however, it was in many ways about laying out her establishment credibility with Pennsylvania voters — she was accompanied by such leading Pennsylvania figures as Gov. Ed Rendell and Philly Mayor Michael Nutter — and contrasting herself against Barack Obama on the experience issue, without ever naming him directly.
Key quote:
So we need a president who can restore our confidence, a president who is ready to confront complex economic problems with comprehensive solutions, a president who will act at the first signs of trouble, working with experts to identify the problem, with agencies to adapt regulations, with Congress to pass necessary legislation, working to prevent crises rather than just reacting too little too late. We need a president who is ready on day one to be Commander-in-Chief of our economy.
Hillary also contrasted herself with Obama by depicting herself as the wonk who will get results, and not just give off a flashy image. "I know this kind of policy isn't particularly glamorous and it probably won't make headlines," she said. "But it will make a critical difference in helping families save their homes and getting our economy back on track."
Hillary spokesperson Phil Singer has responded to Obama campaign manager David Plouffe's remarks this morning, in which he hit Bill Clinton for questioning Obama's patriotism...
It's tough to see how the Obama campaign can be taken seriously when its attacks are based on lies. There’s broad recognition from Governor Richardson to the National Review that these comments had nothing to do with Senator Obama’s patriotism.
Though I agree with the idea that Bill's comments had nothing to do with Obama's patriotism, "based on lies" seems as excessive as Plouffe's comments do.
Separately, a number of you have written in to say that there's a larger context to Bill's remarks that has not been noted here or in many other reports. Does anyone have a link to documentation or a transcript of that larger context? If so, please send along and we'll post.
On a conference call with reporters just now, Obama campaign manager David Plouffe came as close as possible to alleging outright that the Clinton campaign has a "history" and a "pattern" of questioning Obama's patriotism.
Plouffe was asked whether Obama stands by remarks by Obama surrogate General McPeak, who compared Bill Clinton to Joe McCarthy on the basis of this quote from Bill:
"I think it would be a great thing if we had an election year where you had two people who loved this country and were devoted to the interest of this country. And people could actually ask themselves who is right on these issues, instead of all this other stuff that always seems to intrude itself on our politics."
On the call, Plouffe was asked whether Obama stood by the McCarthy comparison and how that squared with Obama's call for a new politics. Plouffe replied that he didn't think Obama would have used that "exact term," but described McPeak's general take as "a fair reading" of the former President's remarks.
Plouffe then alluded to Hillary's recent claim that only she and John McCain have passed the "commander-in-chief test," and said that there's been a "pattern" of the Clinton camp making such claims and then denying their implicit meaning. "Questioning patriotism, we don't think has a place in this campaign," Plouffe said.
I've been hesitant to weigh in on this, but here goes. I'm with Obama supporters Bill Richardson and Andrew Sullivan, both of whom disagree with the idea that Bill was questioning Obama's patriotism here. There's no mention whatsoever of Obama by Bill. He seems to be clearly envisioning an ideal world in which two people could run against one another without there being any questioning of their patriotism and without such charges being hurled back and forth.
Now, you can mock the idea of Bill yearning for such purity of discourse, given that he's certainly said some questionable stuff throughout this campaign. Nonetheless, it's a huge stretch to interpret these particular remarks the way McPeak, Plouffe, and the Obama camp have elected to here. Hinting that they prove a "pattern" is also a huge stretch. To interpret them in this fashion requires that you want to interpret them this way.
A new Rasmussen poll of Nevada shows that this red state could be poised to vote Democratic this time around, with both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton narrowly beating John McCain for now:
Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN), one of Hillary Clinton's top surrogates in the Senate, is floating a new metric by which super-delegates should decide to back Hillary: That the states she's carried in the primaries represent more electoral votes than the state Barack Obama has carried.
"So who carried the states with the most Electoral College votes is an important factor to consider because ultimately, that’s how we choose the president of the United States," Bayh said yesterday on CNN.
The tally shows it's not an overwhelming difference: Hillary has carried states representing 219 electoral votes, plus 44 from the rogue primaries in Florida and Michigan, while Obama has thus far carried states making up 202 votes.
Hillary Clinton is set to deliver a major policy speech at 10 a.m. this morning in Philadelphia. addressing the mortgage crisis and reportedly proposing a plan for the government to buy out failed mortgages.
The mortgage crisis is probably going to be a big issue in the Pennsylvania primary, along with other economic problems that are hitting blue-collar voters. So expect Hillary to play up these issues where she's generally had an advantage over Barack Obama.
The Washington Post reports that as Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton compete over who is more qualified to be president, both are being accused by Senate colleagues of building up their accomplishments a little too much beyond what's actually deserved.
Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) says that Obama has tried to put his name up as a key backer of the failed immigration bill from 2006 and 2007, when in reality all he did was attend some press conferences and sit in on meeting.
Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton is coming under fire from political opponents for claiming that she was a main force behind establishing the SCHIP program in the 90s, and for supposedly taking a lead role in major international incidents during her husband's administration.
This morning's New York Times takes a look at two episodes that John Mccain would probably prefer to forget, if he wants to work on conservative unity in this election: The times in 2001 and 2004 when Democratic operatives say he was interested in switching parties, once to flip control of the Senate and the other time to potentially become John Kerry's running mate.
McCain already has the Republican nomination sewn up, so there may be a limit to just how much damage these allegations could do — but it can't be good for getting the activists jazzed up about supporting their nominee.
During an appearance with Philadelphia-based conservative talk-radio host Michael Smerconnish, Barack Obama mounted a defense of Jeremiah Wright's accomplishments, despite some areas of disagreement. And on top of that, he managed to get in a reminder of some of Bill Clinton's personal problems in the 1990s.
"Understand this," Obama said, "something else that has not been reported on enough is despite these very offensive views, this guy has built one of the finest churches in Chicago. This is not a crackpot church.
"Witness the fact that Bill Clinton invited him to the White House when he was having his personal crises. This is a pillar of the community and if you go there on Easter on this Easter Sunday and you sat down there in the pew you would think this is just like any other church."
Both campaigns are working to register voters as Democrats for Pennsylvania's closed primary by tomorrow's deadline, so an appearance on Smerconnish's show would make sense in the Obama campaign's efforts to recruit independents and crossover Republicans.
During his appearance this morning on Fox News Sunday, Bill Richardson attempted to dial back the negativity in the Democratic race, rejecting the accusation by retired Air Force Gen. Tony McPeak that Bill Clinton was engaging in McCarthyism against Barack Obama.
"I don't believe President Clinton was implying that," the former Clinton cabinet member Richardson said of the allegation that Bill Clinton was questioning Obama's patriotism.
On the other hand, Richardson strongly responded to James Carville's comparison of Richardson endorsing Obama to Judas Iscariot selling out Jesus for 30 pieces of silver. "I'm not going to get in the gutter like that," Richardson said. "And you know, that's typical of many of the people around Senator Clinton. They think they have a sense of entitlement to the presidency."
