Hillary Clinton further seized on the opening provided by Barack Obama's "bitter" remarks, telling a crowd in Indiana that she herself is no stranger to guns.

"You know, my dad took me out behind the cottage that my grandfather built on a little lake called Lake Winola outside of Scranton and taught be how to shoot when I was a little girl," said Clinton.

"You know, some people now continue to teach their children and their grandchildren. It's part of culture. It's part of a way of life. People enjoy hunting and shooting because it's an important part of who they are. Not because they are bitter."

She later added, however, that she is not herself an expert with firearms: "As I told you, my dad taught me how to shoot behind our cottage. I have gone hunting. I am not a hunter. But I have gone hunting."

Barack Obama now says that "I deeply regret" offending anyone who might have been offended by the phrasing of his words about small-town values and economic frustrations, a step back from his more forceful rebuttal to his critics yesterday

From an interview with the Winston-Salem Journal:

"Well look, if there - obviously, if I worded things in a way that made people offended, I deeply regret that. But the underlying truth of what I said remains, which is simply that people who have seen their way of life upended because of economic distress are frustrated and rightfully so. And I hear it all the time when I visit these communities. People say they feel as if nobody is paying attention or listening to them and that is something - that is one of the reasons I am running for president. I saw this when I first started off as a community organizer and the steel plants had closed, and I was working with churches in communities that had fallen on hard times. And they felt angry and frustrated."

Updated below.

Hillary chief strategist Geoffrey Garin dramatically raised the stakes in the battle over Barack Obama's comments about small-town America, saying in an interview that they would be "damaging" to him in a general election, could set back the Democratic Party's efforts to reach heartland voters, and should be something that super-delegates consider when deciding whom to support.

"These are the kinds of attitudes that have created a gulf between Democrats and lots of small-town and heartland voters that we've been working very, very hard to bridge," Garin told me today in his first public comments about the flap.

"I saw Senator Obama's comments as a step backward to building those kinds of bridges," Garin continued, saying the following of the impact that the comments could have in a general election:

"They will be damaging. And they could be significantly so...I don't think that the kinds of attitudes that Senator Obama expressed are consistent with Democrats doing what we need to do to win a general election."

In the wide-ranging interview, Garin also:

* Suggested that the comments were "completely fair game" for use in an ad, and an "important topic"

* Said that he would "hope" that the Clinton campaign would point to the comments in their efforts to persuade super-delegates to back her over Obama

* Said that Mark Penn felt "embarrassed" and felt like he'd been "taken to the woodshed," and allowed that Penn "did a dumb thing"

* Said that while Hillary's reputation "isn't going to get any worse," Obama's "isn't going to get any better"

* Said that Obama had implied that working-class people are "small-minded"

"Working class people in all parts of America are frustrated, but they are not small-minded in the way that Senator Obama's comments conveyed," Garin said.

Read more »

The skirmishing around Obama's remarks about small town America intensified this morning, with Hillary hammering them as "elitist and out of touch" -- language strikingly similar to that used by McCain's spokesperson yesterday.

Hillary also used the remarks to pivot over to a discussion of her own "Midwestern values," and strikingly, she even suggested implicitly that she's more respectful of people's faith than Obama, a member of the United Church of Christ. "Americans who believe in God believe it's a matter of personal faith," she said...

Meanwhile, Obama this morning mounted a spirited defense of his comments. He sought to use the political fight to renew his call for a new politics, dismissing the fight as a "typical political flare-up" and adding that we have to get past such "distractions."

Obama also that he'd spoken the truth in saying folks are "bitter." Notably, he softened his language about religion, saying that it's understandable that some "take comfort from their faith."

But he appeared to concede that he'd misspoken, saying: "I didn't say it as well as I should have...but what is absolutely true is that people don't feel like they're being listened to."...

Full transcripts after the jump.

Read more »

The ever-entertaining New Jersey Senate race just got a lot less funny today, with the Republicans finding what may well be a serious candidate. Andy Unanue, whose candidacy was ruined by allegations of chronic drunkenness, dropped out of the race and was able to substitute the name of a new candidate in place of his own on the primary ballot: Former Congressman Dick Zimmer.

However, Zimmer will still have his own problems. He previously ran for the Senate in 1996, losing by a 10-point margin, and then failed to regain his House seat in a squeaker of a race in 2000. Since them, he's worked in Washington as a lobbyist — and the eventual Democratic opponent, whether it's incumbent Sen. Frank Lautenberg or one of his primary challengers, will be sure to use that against him should he win the GOP nomination.

Here, from Obama spokesperson Tommy Vietor, is Obama's response to Hillary and McCain's criticism of his comment about small-town America:

"Senator Obama has said many times in this campaign that Americans are understandably upset with their leaders in Washington for saying anything to win elections while failing to stand up to the special interests and fight for an economic agenda that will bring jobs and opportunity back to struggling communities. And if John McCain wants a debate about who's out of touch with the American people, we can start by talking about the tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans that he once said offended his conscience but now wants to make permanent."

No mention of Hillary -- only McCain.

Late Update: Here's video of Hillary's hit on Obama:

Late Late Update: HuffPo has posted a full transcript of Obama's remarks.

Very Late Update: Here's Obama's response at a rally in Indiana, mentioning both Hillary and McCain, but mainly McCain:

Hillary has just taken a hard shot at Obama over some comments he was reported to have made about small town America, saying of Obama that "Pennsylvanians don't need a President who looks down on them."

According to The Huffington Post, Obama, at an event with some of his wealthier California backers, said the following about life in hardscrabble small town America.

"You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them," Obama said. "And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not."

"And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

Hillary, in comments to reporters just moments ago in Philadelphia, seized on Obama's use of the word "bitter," and said (transcript sent over by her campaign):

"I saw in the media it's being reported that my opponent said that the people of Pennsylvania who faced hard times are bitter. Well, that's not my experience.

"As I travel around Pennsylvania, I meet people who are resilient, who are optimistic, who are positive, who are rolling up their sleeves. They are working hard everyday for a better future, for themselves and their children.

"Pennsylvanians don't need a president who looks down on them, they need a president who stands up for them, who fights for them, who works hard for your futures, your jobs, your families."

A spokesperson for McCain has also taken a shot at Obama over the comment, saying it "shows an elitism and condescension towards hardworking Americans that is nothing short of breathtaking."

The Obama camp is being mum on this thus far. We'll see whether the Friday night news black-hole smothers this story.

Late Update: Obama responds, and doesn't mention a certain someone.

New Zogby numbers in Pennsylvania: Hillary leads Obama by only four points, 47%-43%. Eight percent are undecided.

A key finding from the poll that may explain why it's close: While more than half of voters say the economy is their top concern, Hillary's edge is only five points -- 41%-36% -- on the question of which is most likely to help the respondent's financial situation.

The poll also found that Hillary's advantage was statistically insignificant on the question of which would be most likely to help the middle class.

Full poll here.

Okay, this McCain-Soros story just keeps on giving.

McCain sent out a fundraising letter yesterday attacking a planned third-party Dem effort because it's being funded by George Soros, a reliable villain for many on the right. But as I reported below, a group that McCain co-chaired also was perfectly happy to benefit from Soros' generosity.

The group, a good-government outfit called the Reform Institute, received $150,000 from Soros in 2003 -- when McCain was its honorary co-chair and McCain's current campaign manager (the same guy who signed yesterday's fund-raising letter) was its president.

But it gets still better.

I've now learned that in 2002, Soros' charitable foundation, the Open Society Institute, gave $300,000 in grants to various groups that were defending the Arizona senator's campaign finance law against legal challenges to it.

An OSI spokesperson, Laura Silber, confirms to me that Soros' foundation gave $300,000 to the Brennan Center specifically for use defending McCain-Feingold. Brennan subsequently distributed that sum to various groups fighting on behalf of the McCain-sponsored law.

So by my count, Soros has contributed a total of $450,000 either to a group co-chaired by McCain or to defending McCain's pet legislation.

There was nothing wrong with Soros' money then, presumably. Yet now the McCain campaign is attacking a fledgling Dem effort because it's taking money from...Soros.

Doesn't get more mavericky than that.

Asked to comment, McCain spokesperson Brian Rogers emails: "This just in: George Soros' charitable foundation gave money to push campaign finance reform, the spirit of which he’s now clearly violating with a $40 million partisan attack ad campaign."

Change to Win, the coalition of unions backing Obama, is upping the pressure on the Hillary campaign to dump Mark Penn, releasing a new statement demanding that she "sever all ties" with Penn and launching an online pressure campaign designed to force her to do just that.

The latest statement ties Penn directly to "triangulation," a word folks obviously associate with the Clintons, and blames it directly for the decline of living conditions for the American worker.

“"High-priced consultants like Mark Penn who shape our laws to suit their clients are poisoning our political system and robbing voters of their faith in our democratic process," the statement says. "Triangulation has been the strangulation of the hopes and dreams of American workers...There is no place at the table for union-busters."

There's no evidence that the Obama campaign is orchestrating Change to Win's continuing pressure on Hillary, but it's obvious that Penn, and Hillary's refusal to get rid of him once and for all, is a gift that keeps on giving for the Obama camp.

The question, though, is whether this latest broadside represents enough of an advancement of the assault on Penn to merit significantly more coverage.

Separately, The Huffington Post has some brutal quotes about Penn from Hillary-ite Paul Begala.

Full Change to Win statement after the jump.

Read more »

This is a fun one: John McCain is attacking a new pro-Dem third party group because it's being partly funded by George Soros -- even though a group McCain co-chaired took one hundred and fifty thousand dollars from Soros, too.

Yesterday, McCain sent out a fundraising email blasting the new Soros-funded Dem effort.

"George Soros the `liberal megadonor' is at it again," McCain campaign manager Rick Davis wrote, sounding the "Soros" alarm in a way guaranteed to get right-wingers to open their wallets. "He and his group of billionaire left-wing Democrats have pledged $40 million dollars of soft money to smear John McCain in a national television ad campaign."

But it turns out that Soros' charitable foundation, the Open Society Institute, gave $150,000 to a group called the Reform Institute, which is dedicated to campaign-finance reform and transparency in government, an OSI spokesperson confirms. The grant was made in 2003.

McCain was honorary co-chair of the Reform Institute starting in 2001, when the group was founded, and held that post until 2005.

It gets better.

Read more »

Obama, today in Indiana:

“I think it was surprising to me that a high ranking, if not the highest ranking, member of Senator Clinton’s team would be engaged in business activities and lobbying that was directly contrary to the position Senator Clinton had taken,” he said.

But if one of his advisors had done the same thing?

“Let me put it this way: I’m not surprised that Senator Clinton found herself in an uncomfortable position as a consequence. And I know that if staff of mine were putting me in that kind of position, I would get rid of them.”

Hillary spokesperson Jay Carson's response:

“When Sen Obama’s top economic advisor told the Canadian government not to take his anti-NAFTA rhetoric seriously, he and his staff misleadingly denied that the meeting ever occurred, and then took absolutely no action,” Carson said in a statement. “It’s good to know he has a higher standard for our campaign than his own.”

That last barb was a pretty good line, Jay, though I'm sure lots of folks will be objecting to the Goolsbee-Penn comparison, since they're hardly of comparable stature within the campaigns and were engaged in different types of activities.

Late Update: Oh, and Penn was getting paid; Goolsbee wasn't.

Late Late Update: It's also worth noting, however, that Goolsbee was reported (though it's been disputed) to have been characterizing Obama's position, while Penn wasn't characterizing Hillary's position. Meanwhile, here's video of Obama:

Yesterday on the stump Hillary reiterated her opposition to the Colombia trade agreement -- and in the process, she laughed.

This, naturally, pricked up the ears of lots of folks in our political press corps, who derive great enjoyment from taking note of Hillary's laugh...

MSNBC:

Hillary's Laugh Is Back

PITTSBURGH -- Clinton can't shake questions surrounding her stance on trade and her husband's differing views on the matter. Today, she responded with a hearty laugh -- the kind once criticized and mocked by pundits and the media.

CNN:

Clinton laughs off Colombia questions

PITTSBURGH, Pennsylvania (CNN) – Hillary Clinton used her trademark laugh Thursday to deflect a question about the $800,000 her husband earned in 2005 giving speeches for a Bogota-based group that supports the Colombia free trade agreement — the same trade deal she currently opposes.

The Washington Post:

Questions on Trade Agreement Bring Back the Laugh

PITTSBURGH, Pa. -- Asked about her husband's receipt of almost $1 million from a group that backs a trade deal with Colombia that she opposes, Sen. Hillary Clinton turned to a tactic she had used often early in her campaign, though not recently: laughing off the question.

Great minds...

I haven't seen this analysis done before, and it's worth a look. The Washington Post examines Obama's astonishing fundraising success in detail and finds that while Obama has reaped the benefits of what is effectively a small donor revolution, his corralling of huge numbers of givers has been partly enabled by a team of wealthy "bundlers":

Seventy-nine "bundlers," five of them billionaires, have tapped their personal networks to raise at least $200,000 each. They have helped the campaign recruit more than 27,000 donors to write checks for $2,300, the maximum allowed. Donors who have given more than $200 account for about half of Obama's total haul, which stands at nearly $240 million.

This doesn't change the significance of Obama's fundraising accomplishment; it merely explains it in a more probing way than we've seen yet. The whole thing is worth a read.

This morning, Obama will call for "passage of his legislation to require corporations to hold a nonbinding shareholders vote on compensation packages offered to executives," according to his campaign.

Obama is set to hold a press availability in Indiana to discuss his proposal -- and plans to take on John McCain over the issue, setting the stage for a general election showdown over the economy and the GOP's hands-off approach to it.

"I know Senator McCain had some sharp words the other day about what some CEOs are getting paid," Obama will say. "And I was glad to hear it. But when he’s had the chance to do something about this problem, he’s opted for continuing the do-nothing approach of the Bush years."

Obama's full prepared remarks after the jump.

Read more »

During a campaign stop today in Indiana, Bill Clinton defended his wife's reputation on the Bosnia flap, claiming it was all a product of a misstatement at 11 p.m.

"This is a big deal to her," Bill said. "Some of you may have seen that she took a terrible beating in the press for a few days because, she was exhausted at 11 o'clock at night and she started talking about Bosnia and she misstated the circumstances under which she landed in Bosnia. Did you all see all that?"

"And, oh, they acted like she was practically Mata Hari, you know? Just making up all this stuff," he added, then going on to describe just how dangerous a place Bosnia was.

Sleep deprivation doesn't completely explain Hillary's series of comments. But either way, the Clinton camp might still not be too happy having the story pushed back into the headlines.

The new NRCC ad in a Louisiana special election for the House has an interesting motif against Democratic nominee Don Cazayoux (prounced CAZH-you) — some forced schoolyard-style word-play around his name:

"Cazayoux, 'Tax You,'" the announcer says, not quite getting the pronunciation just right. "Hard to spell, harder to pay for."

Of course, there's a pretty thin record of scoring political points by making a joke of someone's French surname in Louisiana. But we'll see how it plays this time on May 3rd.

Dick Cheney, in an interview today, fiddles with his deck of cards and fingers the one with the big "W" on it:

“I've watched what's going on on the Democratic side with great interest, and sort of blowing hot and cold in terms of who is going to win -- whether it is going to be Sen. Clinton or Sen. Obama,’’ Cheney noted in a telephone interview with conservative talk show host, Sean Hannity, today.

"I thought the controversy over Rev. Wright was remarkable," Cheney said. “I thought some of the things he said were absolutely appalling. And, you know, I haven't gotten into the business of trying to judge how Sen. Obama dealt with it, or didn't deal with it, but I really, I think -- like most Americans -- I was stunned at what the Reverend was preaching in his church and then putting up on his website.’"

Worth noting that Cheney appears to have brought up Wright himself.

It's awfully kind of Cheney to refrain from judging Obama's handling of the Wright affair. But I think I'm on pretty safe ground predicting that Cheney's reticence -- and that of much of the Republican Party, with the "honorable" exception of McCain -- will suddenly vanish should Obama become the nominee.

Does Obama have trouble among so called "beer-track" voters (a.k.a. blue collar whites) against McCain? Yes — but conversely, Hillary has just as much trouble against McCain with the "wine-track" crowd.

That's what a new Gallup poll released today finds.

McCain beats Barack Obama 46%-40% among voters with only a high school education or less, while Obama pulls ahead among voters with some college all the way up to a post-grad degree. Meanwhile, Hillary win the high school or less vote by a 48%-43% margin, then proceeds to lose the college-educated at all levels.

The interesting part is that Gallup has had very similar top-line results for the two Dems' trial heats against McCain, but it turns out they take remarkably different routes to get there.

The new AP/Ipsos poll reveals that Barack Obama has weathered some damage since his February peak, before the Wright controversy dragged him down in March.

Back in late February, Obama led McCain 51%-41% — but now it's a 45%-45% tie. Perhaps most notably, McCain has taken a lead among independents, a core group for Obama.

For her part, Hillary Clinton has a slim lead of 48%-45% over McCain, while Obama continues to lead Hillary for the nomination by 46%-43%. But the Democratic race has continued to take a toll on party unity: About a third of Clinton supporters say they'd back McCain over Obama, and a quarter of Obama supporters would pick McCain over Hillary.

And around and around we go: Here's Obama's new radio ad responding to Hillary's ad from yesterday accusing Obama's earlier ad of being misleading because it said Obama doesn't take money from oil companies.

The new ad -- which you can listen to here -- seeks to persuade the blue collar and lower-middle-class voters who comprise a key Hillary constituency that Obama, too, feels their economic pain:

"Across Pennsylvania, we're living the problems: An economy in shambles. Families struggling. Gas prices close to $4 a gallon. What's Hillary's answer? Misleading negative ads."

Recent polls show Hillary with a double-digit lead among Pennsylvania voters who cite the economy as a driving concern, but Obama has shown that he's been able to start making gains among some of her core constituencies in the state.

Late Update: Full transcript after the jump.

Read more »

This passed unnoticed, but John Edwards popped up and spoke out publicly the other day -- he penned a letter to the editor of The New York Times, demanding that the paper and other media be more accurate when it comes to counting our wounded in Iraq.

In his letter, he pointed out that the Pentagon has two sets of numbers for counting the wounded -- a weekly stat, which is incomplete because it leaves out those who became ill and required air transport from the war zone, and another monthly report that has complete numbers.

"After five years, it is time for respected news organizations to use the complete number," Edwards wrote. "And every day we should honor those who have been hurt. That number is 60,645 and rising."

Edwards was hitting on an issue that few are aware of but has great importance to veterans and some Capitol Hill staffers working on their behalf.

Whoever you back for president, and whatever you thought of Edwards' candidacy, something was undeniably lost when Edwards called it quits. These days, the only talk you hear about Edwards in political circles is about whether he'll endorse, but he's still out there, plugging away on the issues he cares about.

Here's a fun little flap out of California: It's already been reported that the Hillary campaign is leaving behind some unpaid bills, but now they may be soon getting a call from a collections agency.

It seems Bill Clinton campaigned for Hillary at the University of California's Davis campus earlier this year -- and since then his campaign has only paid a bit more than half the $11,000 it owes the school for the event.

TPM Reader JL sends in this little article about the flap from The Reporter of Vacaville. The paper reports that the school has now laid down a deadline of May 10th to get its money -- and if it doesn't, university officials are threatning, they're sending the matter to collections.

As TPM's Eric Kleefeld puts it, "forget the polls -- the Clinton campaign is about to get screwed on its credit rating."

CNN has just released an average it has done of recent polls in Pennsylvania, and if the findings are accurate, things are looking pretty rough for her in the state:

Sen. Hilary Clinton's lead over Sen. Barack Obama in the crucial primary state of Pennsylvania has dwindled to 4 points, a CNN average of recent polls calculated Thursday shows...

Recent CNN "poll of polls" suggest the race in Pennsylvania is tightening before the state's April 22 primary. A poll of polls calculated two days ago showed Clinton with a 6 point lead in Pennsylvania, and a poll of polls last Friday showed her on top by 11 points.

Hillary now leads 46%-42%. That's a drop of seven points in Hillary's average lead -- in just under a week. Obama's three-to-one spending advantage on ads in the state may be paying off.

Montana governor Brian Schweitzer is sometimes mentioned as a possible running-mate for Barack Obama. And thus far he's neutral in the presidential race.

But in an interview with ABC News, he was surprisingly critical of the Illinois Senator's policies...

While Schweitzer has not proposed his own universal health care plan in Montana, he believes Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., is right to have endorsed a mandate on the national level.

By not requiring individuals to purchase insurance, Schweitzer believes Obama's plan to forbid insurance companies to deny coverage because of pre-existing conditions will lead to healthy people opting out and sick people opting in.

"You've got to get everyone in the system," said Schweitzer.

He is dismayed that Obama cast a vote for President Bush's 2005 energy bill while regularly criticizing the president on the issue.

"Sounds like Senate-speak," said Schweitzer.

Montana votes on June 3rd, the last day of voting. Schweitzer's criticism won't affect his choice of whom to back, since he said he'll endorse whoever wins his state. But it's unusual to hear such blunt talk from a neutral party -- one who has such a high profile in a state that's soon to vote -- about the likely nominee.

Hillary picks up a Pennsylvania super-delegate, former Pittsburgh Mayor Sophie Masloff, her second in the state since Rep. John Murtha endorsed her last month.

Meanwhile, the Obama camp says he's nabbed another super-del of his own today: Utah Democratic Party Chair Wayne Holland.

As of right now, CNN's super-delegate count says Hillary has 243 and Obama has 215, though it's unclear whether that includes today's new announcements.

A new Rasmussen poll of New Mexico, where GOP Senator Pete Domenici is retiring, shows Rep. Tom Udall (D) with significant leads over both potential Republican nominees, Reps. Steve Pearce and Heather Wilson:

Udall (D) 54%, Pearce (R) 40%
Udall (D) 56%, Wilson (R) 36%

Among independent voters, Udall leads Pearce by 12 points, and beats Wilson by 19 points — perhaps owing to Wilson's involvement in the U.S. Attorney scandal damaging her credibility.

David Brock, the one-time conservative media man and now the liberal founder of Media Matters, is starting up a proposed multi-million effort to go after John McCain — specifically seeing a need to be filled as the Democratic race goes on longer than expected.

"A void that might be filled, while the Democrats fight it out, by the press is not going to be filled, because the press is in love with John McCain," Brock said. "It's what McCain is allowed to say without being challenged by facts that will show him to have said something different in the past."

During an appearance on Good Morning America, Colin Powell described himself as undecided voter but also had some kind words for Barack Obama — a sign that the former Bush Administration cabinet member might cross over and endorse a Democrat this year:

Powell's answer to the critique that Obama lacks executive experience: "He didn't have a lot of experience in running a presidential campaign, did he."

On the other hand, maybe Obama wouldn't want Powell's support, in light of his reported involvement in approving the use of torture.

A new Time poll of Pennsylvania gives Hillary Clinton a narrow lead in the Pennsylvania primary, with a fairly high undecided number: Clinton 44%, Obama 38%.

The poll also shows that the rough Democratic race has taken a toll on party unity, at least for now — 26% of clinton supporters would be more likely to back McCain if Obama wins the nomination, along with 16% of Obama supporters if Clinton gets the nod.

Elizabeth has stepped back a bit from yesterday's statement that she has more confidence in Hillary Clinton than Barack Obama on the issue of health care, saying instead that she and John Edwards could be best effective at this point as "honest brokers" on issues they care about, rather than endorsing any candidate.

She also denied that a reported conversation with Barack Obama turned them off from his candidacy, but did acknowledge some differences: "And where there are differences, we talked about those differences and why I believed John's was right."

A new Rasmussen poll of Alaska shows Sen. Ted Stevens — a key Senate appropriate and TPMmuckraker all-star — in serious danger of losing re-election after nearly 40 years in office. The numbers: Stevens (R) 46%, Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich (D) 45%.

Due to the various investigations against Stevens and his family, his favorable rating is now only 50% while his unfavorable number is 47% — meaning that Senate Republicans could have yet another seat to worry about during a bad year.

A new InsiderAdvantage poll in Pennsylvania gives Hillary Clinton a ten-point lead, up from a two-point lead last week:

Clinton 48% (+3)
Obama 38% (-5)

From the internals: Clinton leads 54%-33% among whites, and Obama is ahead 62%-22% with blacks. Clinton leads 55%-30% among women, while Obama has a 47%-42% edge with men.

Obama goes up in Pennsylvania with yet another ad, this one featuring him promising to take on the special interests -- the pharmaceutical industry, in this case -- and "put an end to the game playing" in D.C.

The spot, like his others in Pennsylvania, shows him talking sense to a small roomful of nodding voters rather than rallying big arenas with uplifting oratory, in keeping with his emphasis on more intimate campaign events in the state...

Yesterday we brought you our roundup of the Senate races, showing that the Democrats are poised to expand their majority in that chamber. Now we've taken a look at the overall picture for the House.

The verdict? More or less the same — Dems are poised for major gains.

Democrats have only 17-27 House seats at any real risk.

By contrast, the GOP is going to have to defend between 25-33 seats.

Just as we did yesterday, we examined the ratings compiled by non-partisan sources, such as Larry Sabato, Charlie Cook and CQ.

Viewed as a whole, the outlook is pretty amazing. While history has taught us that a party that wins a "wave" election (as the Dems did in 2006) is poised for some losses two years later, we judge that Dems are in a position to expand their majority by anywhere from five to 20 seats.

Read more »

After a FactCheck.org analysis declared a recent Obama ad "misleading" for saying that he doesn't take money from oil companies, the Hillary campaign hit the radio waves in Pennsylvania today with its own ad attacking Obama's ad.

You can listen to the ad here.

FactCheck.org and the Hillary ad both point out that it's not legal for companies to donate to candidates, but the point of the initial Obama ad is that Obama doesn't take money from PACs, which is the way corporations channel money to campaigns.

Hillary's ad also points out that he voted for the Bush-Cheney energy bill and that she voted against it, and her ad has this little twist on her campaign's frequent suggestion that Obama is all talk, no action: "It's time for a president who takes on the oil companies in real life -- not just on TV."

Full script of the Hillary ad here.

Snarkity snarkity snark. Looks like the McCain campaign made a bit of a boo-boo in this Web ad...

"Johm" McCain, eh? As the irrepressible Instaputz, who first caught this, puts it: "this might explain his problems distinguishing between Iraq and Iran."

I'd only add that McCain isn't allowed to have some other dude funding his ads, even if it is his demented twin brother. Looks like we've nabbed him in a campaign finance violation here.

Today's Gallup tracking poll gives Barack Obama a ten-point advantage over Hillary Clinton, matching his previous record lead. The numbers, compared to yesterday:

Obama 51% (+0)
Clinton 41% (-2)

In the general election match-ups, Barack Obama has taken a statistically insignificant lead over John McCain, while Hillary Clinton is tying McCain exactly:

Obama (D) 46%, McCain (R) 44%
McCain (R) 46%, Clinton (D) 46%

Obama took a one-point lead against McCain yesterday, his first edge of any kind in Gallup since the Jeremiah Wright story became a real controversy for him — a sign that he might have dealt with it successfully, or at least that it's been overshadowed by other issues for now.

This is just astonishing:

Barack Obama has spent a record breaking $60 million to run more than 100,000 political television ads in pursuit of the Democratic presidential nomination, a new analysis conducted for CNN shows.

In contrast, John Kerry ran a little more than 19,000 TV ads four years ago in his successful bid for the Democratic nomination, according to TNS Media Intelligence/CMAG, CNN’s consultant on political television advertising spending...

Clinton, who trails Obama in fundraising by about $60 million, has run just over 60,000 TV ads in her bid for the White House.

Obama has run more than five times as many ads as Kerry did. Hillary has run three times as many. Of course, the primary has dragged on far longer, too.

Keep in mind that this ad blitz is funded largely by what is basically a small donor revolution. Obama is now apparently laying the groundwork to possibly opt out of public financing, saying that the Internet has effectively created a "parallel public financing system."

It can be argued -- and Obama likely will argue -- that his success in bringing small donors into the process has proven at least as democratizing as public financing has, if not more so.

As you may have heard by now, a Federal probe has concluded that Ned Lamont's campaign did not bring down Joe Lieberman's campaign Web site with a hack attack, as the Lieberman camp charged on Election Day 2006.

What really happened was that the Lieberman camp's server failed.

This is vindication for Lamont's Internet director, Tim Tagaris (his picture is here). So I checked in with Tagaris, who as you might expect had a few things to say about this.

"The sad thing is, Lieberman himself repeated the charge all day in an attempt to discredit his opponents and drive down Ned's primary vote," Tagaris instant messages to me. "It was broadcast on every cable news channel, and papers from The New York Times to the Hartford Courant wrote about it."

"And he got away with it -- who cares what's reported today," Tagaris continues. "He won the election based on a pattern of lies loudly repeated and dutifully stenographed."

"Now maybe someone will run an investigation into Joe Lieberman's repeated claim that no one wants to end the war more than he does," Tagaris concludes.

It'll be interesting to see if all the cable and print outlets that went nuts over the Lieberman campaign's accusations that day will take note of the fact that the Lamont campaign -- and Tagaris -- have now been cleared.

Late Update: Lieberman spokesperson Dan Gerstein, who also echoed the Election Day attack on the Lamont campaign, sends over this response:

“After the Lieberman campaign website went down the day before the 2006 Democratic primary, we were told by our website administrator that there was clear evidence of an outside effort to disrupt our site, and that the administrator was so certain that the site had been attacked that he was willing to swear to it in a legal affidavit. Based on his assessment, and the fact that there had been at least one prior attack on the campaign’s website, the campaign asked the Justice Department to investigate the incident to find out what happened and determine if a crime had been committed. The Justice Department has shared the results of their investigation with us, the Senator appreciates their diligence and accepts their findings, and we consider the matter closed.”

Hillary's big and very high-profile fundraiser tonight -- which will feature a performance by Elton John at Radio City -- will bring in $2.5 million, Hillary finance chair Hassan Nemazee confirms to me.

The number vastly exceeds some expectations -- an AP story last week, for instance, predicted that the event was "expected to bring in more than $1.5 million," which is nearly a million dollars short of the actual tally.

Nemazee tells me that the event, which will draw 6,000 people, has sold out. "We are in our fifteen month of fundraising, and to do two and a half million is extraordinary," Nemazee says, not without some justification.

Now, none of this changes the fact that Obama, who continues to break records with his astonishingly successful fundraising, will badly outspend Hillary in the remaining states. He is outspending Hillary three-to-one in Pennsylvania right now, for instance.

But Hillary's fundraising numbers, though lower than Obama's, would appear to demonstrate that many of her donors haven't given up on this race yet.

Nemazee confirms, for instance, that an event in Los Angeles last week brought in a couple hundred thousand dollars, and adds that he's secured $50,000 in commitments for another fundraiser in Pittsburgh starring Chelsea Clinton, and another couple hundred thousand dollars in commitments for an event in Houston on the 24th.