-
CNN tried to pin Hillary down on Ted Kennedy's comments that Obama=JFK just like CNN=Politics. After Clinton was done paying her respects to Teddy she quickly moved on to downplay the role surrogates' have in campaigns. "This is about the two of us" she said, and then later added, "You evaluate the two of us because nobody else will be on the ballot." I believe she's talking about that husband of hers.
Wolf Blitzer, not content to have comments stay implicit, bounced a question to Barack Obama about Bill Clinton's tenure in office, and whether Democrats should remember them fondly. Obama, who called Bill out repeatedly a week or two ago, didn't take the bait. He didn't play the victim card, nor did he say Bill's presidential successes are overstated.
I stand corrected on that whole slobberknocker thing.
-
Despite pulling out of the race this week, John Edwards' spirit is
very much with us. Both Obama and Clinton paid tribute to the fallen
candidate in their opening statements, keying in on his poverty work as
especially noble. Clinton gave Edwards a shout out during her original
statement on universal health care. Even CNN left a desk next to Obama,
presumably where Edwards would have sat if he was still with us.
But
this is utilitarian, not unconditional, love. Edwards is still a free
agent, which means it's Edwards-time all the time. Note that Rudy
Giuliani, who endorsed John McCain, didn't receive these testaments
last night at the GOP debate.
-
At this point, the candidates probably dream about their health care policy points in their sleep. Obama nailed his health care response.
Obama managed to name drop Ted Kennedy, refer to his past insurance-expansion experience in Illinois, alluded to his commitment to transparency by showing some respect for C-SPAN, and dinging Clinton on her unwillingness to distance herself from special interests and lobbyists. Four key points delivered smoothly and in a concise answer.
-
The Los Angeles Times' first question already tries to get the candidates to go after each other. Hillary is asked to detail the differences between Obama's policies and hers. Clinton answers the question, but she still manages to present a united Democratic front. That's important for a candidate who is thought to have helped create a schism in the Democratic party. Obama, meanwhile, takes a different tact. He details the differences between him and Clinton, bangs the Republicans, but then goes back to hit Clinton again on special interests, Iraq, and diplomacy. Obama may realize that because he's behind (but surging) in the polls, he's the one who has to go out of his way to make the distinctions.
-
Ferris Bueller's Day Off.
Seriously. He just said as much to the audience.
-
Hello and welcome to a live-blog of the Democratic throwdown. If you aren't watching Lost, you'll be treated to a live-blog of the debate from inside the Kodak Theater. First impressions as the photo pool takes some pictures:
- The CNN set looks much comelier in person than it does on TV. They've also got some pretty fancy translucent-topped desks.
- Wolf Blitzer is personable off-camera. He incorporated Kazhakstan into one of his jokes to warm up a crowd.
- Ryan Seacrest is nowhere in sight. Nor is Oscar.
Stay tuned for more updates, hopefully of the political variety.
-
LOS ANGELES—Barack Obama supposedly hosted an economic town hall meeting today, but it sure didn’t seem like it. While giving a short stump speech and taking questions from the audience, he mentioned the downturn in the economy only once. To be fair, he spoke at length about the struggling middle class—but those lines are leftovers from the prerecession era of the campaign. The times demand irrational exuberance.
The problem isn’t that Obama broke his promise to talk about the economy—I doubt most of the supporters there knew or cared. It’s that the economy is the issue Obama struggles with most, yet he’s not trying to convince voters he knows how to shoot the bears and bring on the bulls.
If Obama wants to win California, he has to take care of two weaknesses: Latinos and the economy. On the latter, the latest Rasmussen tracking poll says nearly half of California Democrats think the economy is the top issue, and Clinton leads by 15 percentage points among those voters.
Obama finally tackled the issue at the end, but only after an eighth-grader asked him, “What would you do as a president to help make the economy get better, not worse?” Obama responded, “OK, that’s a good last question.” Damn right it’s a good question. Obama answered by talking about mortgages, bankruptcy, and tax codes, and he did it pretty well. But he didn’t talk about the Fed, Wall St., or interest rates. Instead of speaking in nitty-gritty financial terms, he reverted to stump snippets on health care and energy independence. He needs to start acting more like Hillary.
This is a problem across the board. Obama doesn’t seem to like talking about details. At the event, he threw out more policies than the crowd knew what to do with—health care, affordable housing, early childhood education, veterans care, immigration reform. Obama didn’t remember to tell people that he thought he could pay for all of these lofty programs until 45 minutes into the event. “And by the way, all these promises I’m making, I’d pay for them,” he said. “Don’t think I’m just making these loud promises. We’ve talked about how we’re going to pay for these initiatives.” Did he tell us what those measures were? No—he moved on instead.
I take Obama at his word—that he has had those discussions. (Indeed, his Web site outlines some of his planned spending.) But he has to start incorporating that wonky talk in his events. Obama doesn’t seem to trust the voters’ capacity to hear high-minded fiscal details every now and then. But if there’s anything he can learn from Hillary, it’s her ability to spew statistics without notes.
Obama has to find a way to talk both details and big ideas, and it would be best if he could figure it out before tonight’s debate. During his answer on the economy, Obama was numbering each of his policy points before he went into why he thought they were good ideas. (Perhaps he’s organized after all.) Near the end of the question, he forgot whether he had already said two or three of his proposals, which led to an unintentionally telling moment. After collecting himself, Obama said, “I’m losing track. I’ve got so many good ideas.” Enough with the ideas, Barack. We want some deets.
-
We just recycled an old Explainer on what happens to the delegates of candidates when they drop out:
On Wednesday, John Edwards surprised pundits by announcing he was dropping out
of the 2008 Democratic presidential race. So what happens to his 61
hard-earned delegates? In this article from the election season of
2004, Brendan I. Koerner answered a similar question about the end of
retired Gen. Wesley Clark's bid for the White House.
Read the rest here.
-
Now that John Edwards has dropped out of the Democratic presidential race so that “history can blaze its path,” Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama will have tonight's debate stage all to themselves. Naturally, the networks (and we) are hyping it as a mano-a-womano showdown, a duel to the death, a steel cage match of political acumen.
Here are a few things to look for:
Knives out. Ever since South Carolina, Obama has ratcheted up the anti-Hillary rhetoric. Without naming names, he told a crowd of 9,000 in Denver yesterday that this election is about “past versus future,” and that it’s time to end the “same do-anything, say-anything, divisive politics.” Clinton’s camp called the speech an “angry screed.” Today, they sent out an e-mail blast denouncing the Obama campaign’s “character attacks.” Look for Obama to cite Hillary’s “distortions” of his record, to play his Iraq vote trump card early and often, and to emphasize his new favorite dichotomy: “ready vs. right.” (Keep in mind he hasn’t tapped the real ‘90s dirt; the words “Whitewater,” “travelgate,” and “Lincoln bedroom” remind unuttered.) Expect Hillary to fire back on Rezko and Obama’s “present” votes, and probably to act hurt once or twice. At this point, Obama could benefit from getting a little steamed, when appropriate. But without an Edwards to bring everyone back to earth, the fuses won’t have much time to cool.
The Golden State pander. Expect to hear a lot about pathways to citizenship, jobs, and strong communities. Also prepare for a resurgence of the driver's license issue. Obama recently declared his support for licenses for illegal immigrants—a stance that will certainly help him among Latinos in California, but which could backfire badly in other states. Hillary officially opposes such licenses, but she’ll have trouble dinging Obama for it, since she famously wavered on the issue in a debate last fall. And hell, now that they’re in California, Obama might even praise Ronald Reagan for real this time.
Stimulate this. Exit polls show voters listing the economy as their top issue. Congress and the White House are approaching a showdown over a stimulus package. Obama and Hillary both have unveiled their own packages and are likely to spend tonight touting them. Obama’s emphasizes fast cash on hand and rebates for low- and middle-income seniors. Hillary’s includes a housing crisis plan that would freeze interest rates and impose a moratorium on some subprime mortgages. She also tosses in money for heating homes. Observers disagree on whose plan is better—as will the candidates.
The Anti-McCain. With John McCain leading the Republican pack, both candidates will try to prove that they’re the one who can beat him. Obama offered a preview of his argument in his Denver speech yesterday: “It's time for new leadership that understands that the way to win a debate with John McCain ... is not by nominating someone who agreed with him on voting for the war in Iraq; who agreed with him by voting to give George Bush the benefit of the doubt on Iran; who agrees with him in embracing the Bush-Cheney policy of not talking to leaders we don't like.” Hillary will argue that she has experience sustaining GOP attacks, whereas Obama’s still green.
Given all this, expect the most furious mid- and post-debate spin yet. After her “win” in Florida, Clinton will try to use her debate performance to build on that “momentum.” Obama’s team, meanwhile, will politely remind everyone of the delegate count.
-
With the results from the Florida Republican primary
tallied, Trailhead reader Meghan Jensen has edged ahead with 26 points out of a
possible 41, making her the fifth person to lead in as many rounds of our Primary
Pool. Four other contestants are right at Meghan’s heels with 25 points.
Florida proved elusive,
with only four contestants predicting the first-, second-, and third-place
winners correctly when predictions were submitted the day of the Iowa caucuses. With only
one round of the pool remaining and eight Feb. 5 contests in play—New York,
California, and Missouri for both parties, Illinois for the Democrats and
Massachusetts for the Republicans—there are still 48 points available next
Tuesday, making this pool anyone’s for the taking.
-
A quick eyeball of Sen. Ted Kennedy’s campaign schedule for Barack Obama makes the strategy pretty clear: National Hispanic Cultural Center, Albuquerque, N.M.; Santa Fe Community College; gatherings in Los Angeles and Oakland. Maybe he’ll drop by a King Taco for good measure.
For months, Hillary Clinton has held a solid lead over Obama in California. Polls show Obama closing the gap—a Rasmussen poll put him within the margin of error. But it’s unclear if he’ll catch up by Feb. 5. Most people are chalking up Clinton’s success to her support among Latinos. She has the backing of Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and United Farm Workers co-founder Dolores Huerta, among other Hispanic leaders; and she’s been courting Latinos, who could make up as much as 25 percent of the state’s Democratic electorate on Super Tuesday, much more aggressively than Obama. (Hispanic sentiment toward Obama seems to be largely based on unfamiliarity.
But with Kennedy on board, Obama is trying to alter the calculus in a week. He may not be able to pull off a win in Hispanic communities. But because of the way delegates are allocated, he doesn’t need to. Micro-electoral guru Ambinder explains why. Briefly, it’s because the state allocates many of its delegates proportionally by district. (California has 53 congressional districts. 241 delegates are given to the winners of the districts. Another 81 delegates go to whoever wins the state.) So say a district has four delegates at stake. Even if a candidate wins sixty percent of the vote in that district, he or she will still receive only two delegates. If there are an odd number of delegates, the most a candidate can win by is one.
So Kennedy doesn’t need to win over every Latino in California for Obama. Just enough to close the gap slightly. That way, as long as Hillary doesn’t rack up a bunch of lopsided wins, the delegate race will be incredibly tight. And given expectations, Obama can live with that.
-
In the days before Super Tuesday, campaign strategy gets complicated.
Apparently Hillary’s plan, at least in part, is to make a bunch of really weird
videos.
The first is an ad called “Freefall,” the main visual
motif of which is a body hurtling through the sky. If Rudy Giuliani had done
it, people would be accusing him of exploiting 9/11 imagery. That might be a
stretch in Hillary’s case, but it’s still slightly discomfiting, even as a
metaphor for the economy.
The campaign has also posted a VH1 Behind the Music spoof called “Hillary and the Band,”
presumably aimed at college kids. The joke: Hillary was once in a band, but she
quit to run for president. The acting isn't bad, and it could have worked as
a straight-faced parody. But then they go and undermine the premise: “Okay. Maybe
Hillary doesn’t shred. But she will: Make
College Affordable. Fight
Global Warming. End the War.” As usual, it was fun until the message part.
-
You know Barack Obama’s problem? He doesn’t appeal enough to young people.
Thank goodness, then, that he has the endorsement of Kal Penn, the actor now and forever known to the world as Kumar. As if the campaign hadn’t already secured the 18-24 male demographic by recruiting Scarlett Johansson to campaign for Obama. Now, by signing up Kumar—er, Penn—it's got that group in a stranglehold.
Penn is holding a series of rallies at Emerson College, Boston University, Boston College, and Tufts University before tonight’s Democratic debate, according to the campaign. It’s unclear what he’ll discuss, although presumably most questions will deal with Guantanamo Bay. Specifically, the upcoming Harold and Kumar 2: Escape From Guantanamo Bay. In the film, Harold and Kumar get arrested for smuggling a bong on a plane to Amsterdam and, suspected of terrorism, get sent to Gitmo. Given that Obama has called for the closing of Guantanamo, he and Ku—Penn—have a lot in common.
After his tour, Penn will return to teaching classes on film at the University of Pennsylvania. Yes, Penn teaches at Penn.
-
Just because we didn’t live-blog doesn’t mean we didn’t
watch the debate. For what it’s worth, we’re adding our belated thoughts to the
cacophony
of instant
reaction. The executive summary: Nobody screwed up, only Romney helped himself.
John McCain: When
did John McCain become slightly senile? His prolonged spat with Mitt Romney
about Mitt’s non-support
of an Iraq
timetable made McCain look like a desperate slanderer. Considering he’s the
undisputed frontrunner, McCain’s whole strategy was nuts. As my Trailhead
colleague Mr. Beam pointed out, he's the senile grandfather you let prattle on
because its too sad to tell him to shut up. Another McCain highlight of the
night was watching him go out of his way to send some love to California Gov. Arnold
Schwarzenegger. Word leaked that Ahnold is endorsing
Johnny Mac tomorrow, so there was no chance McCain was going to disagree
with him on fuel-efficiency
federalism. If Anderson Cooper had some stones, he would have asked McCain
whether the Governator was going to endorse him.
Mitt Romney: Mitt
was sharper than a Mormon steeple tonight. He offered something for all three
Reagan-coalition constituencies. The social conservatives got a gay-marriage
ban shout-out (an issue that has disappeared from this cycle). The national
security conservatives saw Romney mount an effective rebuttal to McCain’s
baseless withdrawal claims. In case fiscal conservatives didn’t already know
it, Romney knows what’s up
when it comes to the economy. When McCain attacked Romney’s record in Massachusetts, Romney
yanked stats out of his brain that only an economic cyborg can remember. With
Reagan’s Air Force One as your backdrop, pandering to the Reagan coalition is a
good idea—no matter how tacky that plane looked.
Mike Huckabee:
This was an ugly debate for the Huckster. What makes Huck such an effective
debater is his ability to use his quips as a gateway into important policy
points. Tonight Huck didn’t do that. His best Huckism was a long-winded stat
about sitting in traffic that didn’t fully connect to his policy point: that
fixing the nation’s infrastructure would stimulate the economy. Plus, he pulled
it off better at a fundraiser
earlier in the day. When Romney and McCain started bickering about Iraq timetables,
Huckabee might as well have been wearing a cloak of invisibility. When he
actually spoke, Huckabee complained about not getting a chance to speak—always
a faux pas.
Ron Paul: Poor
Paul. Cooper gave Dr.
No the silent treatment all night. At one point Cooper cut Paul off while he
was trying to answer two questions in one. Cooper promised Paul would get
another chance to speak “coming up in like two
minutes or two questions.” To be fair, Cooper honored his word, but then
cut him off again later in the evening. At one point Paul recoiled from being
cut off, arched an eyebrow, and cocked his head a bit as he stopped himself
from staring Cooper down. On a related note, I don’t remember the last time
Paul was off-message at a debate. Sure, he’s been reduced to a sideshow (fairly
or not), but at least it’s a consistent one.
-
Should be interesting to see how much pickup this little story gets.
Apparently Mike Huckabee backers raised a reported $111,000 during a ministers’ conference hosted by Kenneth Copeland Ministries in Newark, Texas. This could be problematic for two reasons. One is that televangelist Kenneth Copeland is currently under investigation by Sen. Charles Grassley and the Senate Finance Committee for, among other things, allegedly taking a $2 million gift from a ministers’ conference last year. The other is that Huckabee could be violating FEC regulations by raising money from or through a tax-exempt organization.
Both Huckabee’s people and Copeland’s say this is all above board, fair game, etc. The campaign released a statement saying it rented a room for “a separate event that was hosted by a private individual” unrelated to Copeland’s ministry. A Copeland spokesman told the AP that “[n]o offering was or has been taken for any political candidate by Kenneth Copeland Ministries or at a KCM event.”
But then there’s the whole guilt by association thing. Copeland says he’d rather die than open up the group’s accounting books to the Senate committee. The money, he says in one of his many unhinged rants, “belongs to God.” (The video is well worth your while.) According to Copeland, Huckabee's behind him all the way. Here’s his much-quoted account of what Huckabee told him when they spoke on the phone:
“Are you kidding me? Why should I stand with them [U.S. senators ] and not stand with you ? They only got 11 percent approval rating.” And then he said, then he said, “Kenneth Copeland, I will stand with you.” He said “You’re trying to get prosperity to the people, and they [the senators ] are trying to take it away from ‘ em.” He said “I will stand with you anytime anywhere on any issue.” That settled that right there. I said, “Yeah. That’s my man. That’s my man right there,” Copeland said.
A spokeswoman for Huckabee confirmed that the two men spoke on the phone, but has yet to confirm Copeland's account of their conversation, to us or to anyone else. The story is getting plenty of attention on the blogs. But I doubt it will gain real traction until a candidate *cough* Romney *cough* seizes on it.
Hey look, there's a debate tonight.
-
NEWPORT BEACH, Calif. – Mike Huckabee rolled into Orange County
today for an event inside the gates of Bayview Estates—a development that bills
itself as a “Residential and Equestrian neighborhood.” Something tells me this
isn’t the target audience for Huckabee’s brand of populism. (Although he did get
his biggest round of applause when he started talking about the Fair Tax.) No signs of Mischa Barton
yet, but there were some other scenes that only a Huckabee fundraiser can
provide:
- A Huck
volunteer named Sharon
was put in charge of having the media sign-in. After one cameraman said
his correspondent had already written their names, Sharon responded with a wide smile: “Bless You.”
- Huckabee was asked about the youth vote
by an MTV News correspondent. Mind you that Newport
Beach is where that god-awful MTV show Newport Harbor is filmed. Unfortunately, I don’t think Huck watches much MTV, so he
didn’t quite note the irony.
- As
Huck shook hands and signed autographs, a greasy
guy in his mid-20s tried to impress a bronzed mid-20s gal by saying she
should go up to Huckabee and ask him to sign her breast, rock-star style.
He was kidding. I think.
- One of
the older women in the crowd had a red LED
ticker pinned to her shirt. Huckabee
2008 slowly crawled across her shirt on an endless loop. I should have
introduced her to the breast-autograph guy.
- Before
Huckabee gave his stump speech, one of his supporters went on stage to
offer an opening invocation. He asked Jesus to give Huckabee strength at
tonight’s debate, and he prayed that the American people would come to
their senses and support him.
- The
entire crowd pledged allegiance to the flag before Huckabee spoke. The
person-to-flag ratio in this estate is probably 5-to-1. I counted a few dozen lining the driveway alone.
In spite of—or maybe because of—all of this, Huckabee managed
to raise 100,000 dollars today. Upon hearing the news Huckabee
quipped, “Our campaign is so frugal, we could go a month on that. We probably
won’t but we could.” He's exactly right, if only because Huck will probably be out of the race in a
month.
-
Just as Edwards ducks out, Ralph Nader appears ready to duck in. (Hard to see it as a coincidence when Nader had endorsed Edwards last month.) He launched an exploratory committee today with this call to arms:
Maybe the Democrats and Republicans will nominate Presidential candidates this year who will stand up against the war profiteers, the nuclear industry, the credit card industry, the corporate criminals, big oil, and the drug and health insurance industries.
We doubt it.
The site then proposes an offer. You give Nader $300, he'll give you "two DVD’s—Sicko and Unreasonable Man—and three books destined to become classics—Free Lunch, Gotcha Capitalism, and All The Shah’s Men." It's that simple!
The prospect of another Nader candidacy should surprise no one. (He ran again in 2004, after all.) But it's hard to see him taking a significant bite out of the Democratic vote this time around. In 2000, many Dems, disaffected with the Clinton White House, wanted to try a third way. In 2004, Kerry was so uninspiring that a Ficus tree could have launched a viable third party candidacy. But this year, Democrats are generally pleased with their options.
If Nader wants to put a dent in this election, he'll have to throw in more than a few DVDs. Maybe a Prius.
-
The first time I saw John Edwards in person was a book signing at a Borders in Washington, D.C. He was promoting his new book, Home: The Blueprints of Our Lives. As he spoke about the themes of home and family and home and family, I was awed by the man’s arsenal of platitudes. He could say nothing as earnestly and convincingly as I’d ever seen anyone say anything. It was the perfect introduction to his presidential bid.
There are a lot of explanations for Edwards’ decision to drop out. His opponents’ celebrity, his obsessive focus on Iowa, the limited appeal of his one-note populism. But you can’t discount his unbearable phoniness. Even when I agreed with the message, I bristled at the brazen insincerity —or appearance thereof—of the messenger.
How did Edwards get pegged as the fake guy? A few ways. For one, he said the same thing over and over. Someone compared him to one of those dolls with a pull string that spits out one of 12 different phrases. You could ask him if two plus two equals four, and he would tell you that Washington is overrun by lobbyists and this race is personal for him. His campaign in Iowa was like a political Groundhog Day—every event was interchangeable with the last. Even when given an opportunity to open up and show the “real” Edwards, he declined. In the Las Vegas debate, his response to Tim Russert’s question about his greatest weakness—that “I sometimes have a very powerful emotional response to pain that I see around me”—smacked of self-pity.
Secondly, even when sincere, he sounded like someone trying really hard to sound sincere. Back in 2004, in his vice-presidential debate with Dick Cheney, Edwards praised the veep for “the fact that [Cheney and his wife are] willing to talk about the fact that they have a gay daughter, the fact that they embrace her. It's a wonderful thing.” What theater. The moment was so clearly planned, so smarmily delivered, so thinly veiled, that even Cheney haters had to feel some sympathy. It was like if Hillary praised Obama in a debate for overcoming his coke habit. Cheney thanked Edwards for his thoughts and left it at that.
And third, Edwards got a phony rap because of the contrast with his 2004 persona. For people who got used to him as John Kerry’s cute puppy, the angry attack dog of 2008 felt like an act. In reality, things were more complicated, with Edwards reportedly pushing Kerry to be more aggressive. Kerry’s endorsement of Obama this month only reinforced perceptions that Edwards isn’t the man he was in 2004.
That’s not to say Edwards is somehow less genuine a human being. I’m told that when he goes off the record, it’s like talking to a different person. But the way he came across in public, or when filtered through news outlets, showed a man who repeated himself for fear of saying the wrong thing. He blamed the media for giving his rivals more attention, but never offered up anything but the same old shtick, which after a year of campaigning—let alone four—became tired.
Edwards added a lot to the Democratic field, and he will be missed. He challenged Hillary’s lobbyist ties more forcefully than Obama did. He took Obama to task for his “present” votes. He also exhibited refreshing maturity when Obama and Hillary put each other in choke holds, claiming to represent the “grown-up wing of the Democratic party.” Obama should take a page from his book (as long as it's not Home) and ramp up the intensity going into Super Tuesday. Edwards now has the power to influence the race in a major way. But he won't be remembered as the guy who transformed the 2008 election. He'll be the guy who was too slick by half.
-
SAN DIEGO—A Univision satellite truck was waiting for me as I pulled up to a real-estate and loan office a dozen miles from the Mexican border. A sparse crowd—about 20 people—was schmoozing inside while the correspondent filmed a stand-up in Spanish next to a carefully-taped Hillary sign. The Univision crew was the only broadcast media outlet to show up (and one of only three journalists overall), but I got the sense that the Hillary camp didn’t care. The second Univision showed up, their goal had been accomplished.
The event was essentially a glorified phone bank, focusing specifically on Latino voters. In reality, the event wasn’t much of an event, nor was it all that Latino-focused. Volunteers showed up, they got to meet other Hillary-philes, and they called a bunch of laymen (who may or may not have been Latino) to convince them to vote for Hillary on Tsunami Tuesday. Dozens of these phone banks take place in the state every day (there are three in San Diego, alone). That Univision decided to package a story about such a non-event was a coup for the CCC (Clinton California Campaign) because the story will show that the Clinton campaign cares about the Latino community—and that they don’t take that support for granted.
All of this matters because Obama has a Latino problem and Clinton knows it. Clinton more than doubled Obama’s Latino support in Nevada and doubled his number in the maybe-meaningless Florida results. But Obama isn’t giving up. He’s airing aggressive Spanish-language ads here (as is Clinton), and some journalists bored with the Latinos-like-Clinton storyline are now suggesting Ted Kennedy’s endorsement will magically attract Latinos to Obama. We’re doubtful that’s true, but that’s another post for another time.
This minor phone bank may seem like an inconsequential effort to court Latino voters compared to thousand-person rallies—but it’s not. Because all of the candidates’ schedules are so accelerated, Clinton can’t personally spend time with Latino families like she might have done if California was an early primary state. Instead she—and the rest of the campaigns—have to entrust staffers and volunteers to carry the mantle and the message.
In the Feb. 5 states, more votes will be earned while the candidate isn’t in town than when he or she is. The candidates set the agenda nationally and then the grassroots follow-through locally. It’s a pointillistic approach: When viewed individually, the small events seem like inconsequential dots; but when you zoom out it’s clear that they’re all part of a larger painting. And when a Spanish-language TV station gives a Latino dot its close-up, it makes the overall message even more defined.
-
This election cycle has seen its conventional wisdom
bonfires. Hillary’s inevitability: gone. Obama’s insurmountable lead in New Hampshire: gone.
McCain’s summer of death: long gone. But the most brazen assault on the most
conventional wisdom of all—Giuliani’s decision to neglect the early
states—has failed miserably.
There were moments when the gamble didn’t seem insane. At
one point, Rudy commanded a strong lead nationally and in Florida, which he called his “firewall.”
After Huckabee surged last minute and won Iowa, anything was possible. McCain’s win in
New Hampshire and Romney’s victory in Michigan didn’t exactly
discredit Giuliani’s strategy either. As Slate’s John Dickerson wrote at the time, “the GOP primary
is starting to look like a Pee Wee soccer tournament: Everyone gets a trophy!”
Of course Rudy would get his!
The theory started to crack after Michigan,
when Giuliani’s numbers began sliding nationally and in Florida. By the time both Romney and McCain
snapped up two more trophies, Rudy was all but forgotten. His “slow and steady
wins the race” philosophy crumbled when it turned out he was actually just
slow.
So does this reaffirm the rule that you have to win Iowa or New
Hampshire to win the nomination? Or was this a
worthwhile gamble that didn’t pan out? I’d argue the former. If there was a
year to take the risk, it was this one—the chaotic nature of the contest
appeared to reward patience. And if there was a person who could pull it off,
it was Rudy. He had the national stature to survive without boosts from the
earliest states, and Florida
is big enough that a win there would have reset the game. All the pieces were
there. People are now saying that Rudy did poorly in Florida because
he spent so much time there. Either that or, much as we hate to admit it, the
conventional wisdom was correct.
-
John McCain, welcome to the club. In the past, McCain has
been known as everything from maverick to fringe candidate to walking dead man.
(Last month, we used
the words “McCain” and “embalming fluid” in the same sentence.) He has appealed
to an unlikely combination of independents, national security buffs, war hawks,
and immigration moderates. The question was always whether he could assemble
anything resembling the coalition necessary to win the Republican nomination.
Tonight doesn’t seal the deal, but it’s the beginning of the
end. Momentum-wise, McCain will ride into the Feb. 5 states with a crown
already hovering somewhere near his head, if not sitting on it. That means more
free media (as if he needs it), more donations, more endorsements, and bigger
crowds—all the flakes that make up the ever-growing snowball. Delegate-wise,
he’s now the clear front-runner, with 89 pledged delegates to Romney’s 27.
Now McCain has to spend his capital wisely. He has shown he
can win without independents, seeing as this was a closed election. But the
results also prove McCain can compete on Romney’s turf. Exit polls showed him
towering over Romney among Hispanics—a fact he should exploit in California. Floridians
most concerned about the economy also preferred McCain over his rival—and he
should use that, too, in states hit hardest by the recent market swings. After Florida, Romney’s “base”
is starting to look a lot less stable.
There may even a death blow coming. Word has it Giuliani
will endorse McCain tomorrow. (In his remarks tonight, Rudy said everything you
need for a drop-out speech short of “I am dropping out.”) If so, that could
seal the deal for McCain. Granted, Giuliani supporters might have swung to the Arizona senator anyway.
But the endorsement adds symbolic heft to the reshuffling. And even if you tacked
only half of Giuliani’s 15 percent or so from tonight onto McCain’s, he would
have a punishing lead.
“Our victory might not have reached landslide proportions,”
McCain said in his speech tonight, “but it is sweet nonetheless.” If Florida is any indication, he'll taste it again. But he knows the price. "Tonight, my friends, we celebrate," he said. "Tomorrow, it's back to work."
-
CNN has called it for Hillary. Her lead is decisive—49 to 29
in the latest tally, with a third of precincts reporting. The campaign
is celebrating the victory with a (now legal!) rally in Davie, Fl.
So on a scale of one to vacuum, how empty is her win?
From the Clinton perspective,
this is real--and big. More voters turned out in Florida
than the other primary states so far combined. They’ll say this slows Obama’s
mo’ and provides a more accurate snapshot of the country than South Carolina did. Obama’s people, meanwhile,
are adamant that Florida
shouldn’t matter. Hence this little zinger, sent out by the campaign: “Obama
and Clinton tie for delegates in Florida.
0 for Obama, 0 for Clinton.”
But here’s the problem. Florida represents something, however imprecisely. Say it merely indicates how one
segment of the country sees the two candidates sans campaigning. Even that could be a useful indicator. After all,
most Americans in Feb. 5 states won’t actually see the candidates in person.
They’ll decide based on TV and radio spots, watching speech excerpts on the
news, reading about their policies, and name recognition. And that’s exactly
what informed Democrats in Florida.
Granted, a lot can change in a week, even on a national scale. And of course
this produces no shift in delegates. But to say that the results mean nothing at all seems a little stubborn.
-
Early exit polls (Disclaimer: DO NOT BELIEVE!) show a few interesting trends:
Fox News has McCain trouncing Giuliani among Hispanics, 50 to 26. Romney, meanwhile, trails at 16 percent. So much for those ads featuring his Spanish-speaking son Craig.
McCain also beats Romney among voters who listed the economy as the most important issue facing the country. (Nearly half of voters said it was, according to the AP.) McCain: 38. Romney: 34. Margin of error: +/- 4 percent. The economy is supposedly Romney’s biggest strength. That said, Romney is twice as popular as McCain among voters who list immigration as their top issue.
Florida is getting older, and McCain is benefiting. He beats Romney 40 to 31 among senior citizens. More than a third of voters in this primary are 65 or older, the AP reports.
About 43 percent of Republican voters said that Gov. Charlie Crist’s endorsement of McCain mattered to them. That sounds like a lot, given that most endorsements go completely unnoticed. Of those for whom it mattered, 51 percent voted for McCain, compared to 23 percent for Romney—naturally.
(h/t The Page)
-
A few things to keep in mind as tonight's numbers roll in:
Winner takes all. Normally, most of Florida's 114 delegates are divided among the candidates who win each of the state’s 25 congressional districts, with the remainder allocated to the statewide winner. But this year, because the national party revoked half of Florida's delegates, all 57 delegates go to overall winner. That means whoever wins a plurality (McCain or Romney, most likely) will take a decisive lead in the overall delegate count.
Sorry, we’re closed. This is a closed primary, which means that independents—i.e., John McCain’s base—can’t vote. Instead, he’s counting on a mix of seniors, veterans, and Latinos to push him past Mitt Romney. Romney’s army of fiscal conservatives, on the other hand, will vote in full force. So, in a sense, a McCain win is bigger than a Romney win, since it proves he can succeed even without his moderate base.
Wait for it. Florida’s panhandle operates on Central Time instead of Eastern Time, so its polls close an hour later. That’s where a group McCain calls his “natural constituency”—i.e., veterans and military retirees—resides. Since it’s a tight race between Romney and McCain, networks probably won’t be able to call it until those numbers come in.
Who won where? Florida is a sort of microcosm of the national GOP. With vets in the panhandle, Hispanics in the south, and a mix of transplanted New Yorkers and retirees and independents in the mid-state Interstate 4 Corridor, there’s something in Florida’s electorate for everyone. So prepare for extrapolation, since whatever happens in Florida will inform how people handicap Super Tuesday. Did McCain do better than expected in Tampa, an area considered Reagan country? Maybe that means Romney is also toast in California. Did Giuliani fare better than expected among Cuban-Americans in Miami-Dade? Perhaps that could boost him among Latinos elsewhere. Did Huckabee suck evangelical votes away from Romney across the state? Look for a possible repeat in Georgia.
There’s a lot happening here, so stay tuned.
-
Over the last few weeks we’ve been trying to calculate the candidates’ expiration dates in our Death Watch series. Tonight, two candidates are in jeopardy. We pay our pre-mortem respects to Mr. Giuliani below. See Mike Huckabee’s Death Watch here.
It may not look like it, but Rudy waged a good campaign. He was a solid debater, energetic and dogged on the stump, and was on-message most of the time. But then things soured on two fronts:
- The message: When Rudy was living it up front-runner-style, life was good. His national polls were up in the 40s, the money was rolling in, and with Clinton leading nationally, name-recognition seemed to be the overriding narrative of this election. But once voters actually listened to what Giuliani was saying, the poll numbers sagged. If Rudy’s failure has told us anything, it’s that most Americans just aren’t afraid anymore. Giuliani spread the they’re-going-to-get-us gospel very successfully, but New Hampshire voters in particular just didn’t buy it. When that happened, Giuliani pulled out of New Hampshire—he had already pulled out of the rest—and went to Florida to try his luck there. It seems they don’t want a 9/11 candidate either.
- The primary calendar: Originally, Giuliani’s camp thought that the compressed schedule would help them lay low for a month and then reemerge with a head-start in Florida and a natural constituency in a handful of Feb. 5 states. But they waited one primary too long. In hindsight, Rudy Giuliani needed to win South Carolina just as badly as Fred Thompson did. The only problem: Rudy didn’t have a shot in hell, and he knew it. So he pushed his last stand back to Florida, where he could schmooze with Yankee fans and talk about NASCAR all day. But by the time today’s ballot rolled around, the party coalesced around two guys they don’t really like, but whom they like more than the pro-choice, baseball-polygamist, drag-king Giuliani.
Rudy has intimated that he’ll flee the scene after what’s probably going to be a bloody affair tonight. His aides say they’ll re-evaluate the campaign’s status Wednesday morning, but he’ll probably drop out to avoid embarrassment in the Northeast, where John McCain has eclipsed him recently. There isn’t much chance Rudy will stay in; run a regional Feb. 5 campaign in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut; and wreak utter havoc. He’s buddies with McCain, who stuck up for him at the last debate, and wouldn’t want to do anything to help Mitt Romney win the nomination.
So, after tonight, Rudy’s campaign will probably become a mere memory from the 2008 election. This morning, while flying out of Washington, D.C., a newsstand in the airport was selling candidate-themed t-shirts. There was Rudy, staring at me with the White House behind him. I laughed as I realized that this t-shirt was as close as he was ever going to get.
-
Over the last few weeks we’ve been trying to calculate the candidates’ expiration dates in our Death Watch series. See our pre-mortem death watch for Rudy Giuliani here.
Mike Huckabee does not have delusions of grandeur for Florida. The day after South Carolina, he said he might not have enough money or support to compete with Romney or McCain, so he hedged his bets. He flitted back and forth all week between Georgia and Tennessee, and he’ll watch tonight’s returns in the latter Missouri*. But don’t expect Huckabee to drop out after today, not when he can still do so much damage.
Huckabee won’t win, but he can drag Romney down with him. Huckabee joined the ranks of the walking dead after he lost South Carolina and his money dried up. But unlike Bill Richardson as he faded away, Huckabee actually has some bite left. If the race becomes a McCromney affair, only Mike Huckabee can stop evangelicals from gravitating toward Mitt. Lately, it seems he’s been auditioning for a role as McCain’s VP, and rightly so: If Johnny Mac wins Florida, it will be partly thanks to Huckabee.
With the opportunity to eat fried-squirrel at official White House dinners, don’t expect Huck to buck the trail quite yet. If he finishes third in Florida (he’s polling fourth), he can gush out a Huckabeeism about David (Huck) defeating Goliath (Rudy) that may get him some mileage. From there, he’ll stay in the South and try to siphon enough votes away from Romney to clear the path for McCain. Ironically, Huckabee is now playing the same role for Romney that Fred Thompson played for him in South Carolina. But if nominated, McCain would sooner make Huckabee the VP than Thompson. The old yet virile war hero and the young but inexperienced spark plug—it’s a match made in heaven, aside from that whole modifying-the-constitution-to-fit-God’s-will part.
*UPDATE 5:56 p.m. PST: Originally this post misstated that Huckabee was spending the night in Tennessee. He was in Missouri.
-
Today’s Democratic Florida primary is a political inkblot test.
Given that no delegates are being awarded (for now), you can pretty much interpret the
“beauty contest” results however you want.
As a result, the propaganda battle between the Clinton and
Obama camps has reached fever pitch. Both sides have held conference calls
outlining their cases for why Florida’s
primary does or doesn’t matter. Here’s a quick rundown of their arguments:
Clinton: Florida is an important state that deserves
a role in the democratic process. I will do everything I can to seat its
delegates at the national convention.
Obama: Because Florida violated the
four-state pledge, the Democratic National Committee stripped the state’s
delegates. Florida is therefore meaningless.
Clinton: A record number of people are turning
out, both in absentee ballots and early voting tallies.
Obama: There’s a
controversial property tax ballot measure drawing people to the polls. Also,
the state has no delegates.
Clinton: Obama violated the four-state pledge
by running national TV ads that broadcast in Florida.
That shows he’s taking the race seriously.
Obama: Sorry, no
delegates.
Clinton: Even if we couldn’t campaign in the
state, there is tons of ground organization on both sides, suggesting that this
is a real contest with significant results.
Obama: No hay
delegatos. Comprende?
Clinton: Florida matters because I’m going to win.
Obama: Not any
delegates, you’re not.
Maybe it’s a little more substantive than that, but not
by much.
-
The New Yorker devotes a quickie to Barack Obama’s poker skills. As a state senator in Illinois, Obama won over other politicians by starting a regular poker night. James McManus offers this analysis of his game:
Obama never played for high stakes. Only on a very bad night could a player drop two hundred dollars in these games, typical wins and losses being closer to twenty-five bucks. Link describes Obama as a “calculating” cardplayer, avoiding long-shot draws and patiently waiting for strong starting hands. “When Barack stayed in, you pretty much figured he’s got a good hand,” former Senator Larry Walsh once told a reporter, neglecting to note that maintaining that sort of rock-solid image made it easier for Obama to bluff.
Remember the brave journalist who faced Obama on the basketball court? Some editorial board should invite him to a poker game.
P.S.: Obama should have revealed his passion for poker before Nevada. As we reported long ago, Vegas dealers were all for Hillary.