Oprah Winfrey campaigned with Barack Obama before very big
crowds in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina over the weekend.
The week ahead in presidential politics will see Mike Huckabee try to sustain his surge against Republican rivals and the media, Hillary Clinton try to arrest her precipitous slide in the early states, Barack Obama try to capitalize on his spectacular tour with Oprah Winfrey, Fred Thompson try to get back in the race in Iowa, and another Republican debate, this time in Des Moines.
In California, Hillary Clinton does private fundraising in LA today and has a “Conversation with Warren Buffett” tomorrow in San Francisco, while Barack Obama has several fundraising events, including a big public bash today in LA called the “Generation Obama” concert mobilizing much of young Hollywood including the Goo-Goo Dolls, Scarlett Johansson, Jessica Biel, and Taye Diggs.
Thompson, after tantalizing the political world for much of the year, has mostly fallen out of the top tier in the early state contests. That includes his losing the lead in South Carolina, where he had led, to Huckabee. He’s fighting it out with Rudy Giuliani for a distant third in Iowa, where the fight to win is between Huckabee and longtime leader Romney, who’s now fallen well off the pace. Thompson will spend most of his time between now and January 3rd in Iowa, hoping to to finish a strong third there to retain relevance going into the other states, and perhaps get some juice for a decent showing in New Hampshire, where he could finish sixth, behind Ron Paul.
Mike Huckabee strikes a compassionate conservative stance in
this brand new TV spot.
The man of the hour for Republicans, of course, is Huckabee. He has big leads in Iowa in two new polls, including an astonishing 22-point edge over Romney in a Newsweek poll. He’s surged into the lead in South Carolina and other Southern states, is now essentially tied with Romney for second in Nevada, behind Giuliani, and is moving up in New Hampshire.
Romney still leads in New Hampshire, but his margin over John McCain and Giuliani — who hopes to hang on through what look to be unpromising results in the early contests to get to bigger states at the end of January and early February — is diminished. We may find out this week, incidentally, who was behind those controversial Mormon-baiting, anti-Romney phone calls that the former Massachusetts governor’s team decried as evidence of foul play.
More on the Republicans in a moment. Now to the Democrats.
As I’ve been saying from the beginning, Hillary Clinton is not inevitable. Clinton’s leads in the four earliest states — Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina — are all now evaporating or gone. I’ve previously reported on Barack Obama’s growing Iowa lead in most of the new polls, his pulling to within single digits of Hillary in New Hampshire, and erasing her lead in South Carolina to a statistical dead heat.
Now there’s a set of Mason-Dixon polls for MSNBC confirming the trend in all those states, and extending it now to Nevada. Clinton has long held a big lead in Nevada, but in this new poll, it’s down to 34% to 26%. As I’ve pointed out all along from experience, the Silver State is a place where things can turn on a dime.
The polls do have Hillary on top by a hair in Iowa, by only three points in New Hampshire, the closest ever, and a couple of points in South Carolina. In South Carolina yesterday, Obama’s rally with Oprah Winfrey drew over 30,000 people. In Des Moines on Saturday, they drew 19,000.
New Hampshire was always Hillary’s firewall against a possible loss in Iowa. But that margin for error is now approaching the vanishing point.
Clinton’s attacks on Obama aren’t gaining traction, at least now, and she looks out of synch. She put up a snazzy new ad by the former commander of NATO, victor in the Kosovo War. It says great things about her, including that she will avert a war with Iran.
Which begins to get at the problem. The new US National Intelligence Estimate makes it clear there will be no war with Iran in the foreseeable future. In fact, Iran’s cooperation will be important in devising a settlement of the security and political situation in Iraq, without which the time-limited military surge Hillary supported and then opposed — alternately outraging, then assuaging, the peacenik left — will have been for naught. But because of the threat of Iran, she voted to declare its military a terrorist organization.
Her message and positioning are out of synch. And even before this became evident, she had big problems. She’d already lost her lead in Iowa to the most heavily-funded insurgent candidate in modern American history. Her attacks on him worked at first with the press, but now aren’t working at all. Indeed, they are making her something of a figure of fun, with her overly diligent staff digging up his childhood musings about the presidency, musings shared by millions of American tykes.
Now her lead in national polls, never all that relevant, is sliding. More worrisome, her lead in New Hampshire, her firewall state, is now approaching the vanishing point. That’s before anything finally bad happens in Iowa. And her big lead in South Carolina had evaporated, even before Obama’s campaigning in that state with the most admired celebrity on the planet, someone with special appeal to women and blacks, two key cores of her electoral support.
Back on the Republican side, while Giuliani will continue to contend with questions about his undisclosed consulting clients, his close associates, and charges that he misused city resources as New York’s mayor, all of which have taken a serious toll, Mitt Romney will deal with his declining appeal to Christian social conservatives and then, probably prepare attacks on Huckabee.
Did Mitt Romney deal with his “Mormon problem” in his ballyhooed speech on “Faith In America” late last week? Not really. He barely mentioned his own controversial religion, the proximate cause of his speech. Well, actually, the cause of his speech is Huckabee’s surge past Romney into the lead in Iowa. Romney has always counted on Iowa dominance to launch his campaign into the stratosphere, and has spent megabucks there to insure it, only to see Huckabee and his relative ragtag band storm past on account of his consistent social conservatism and personable preacher manner. With a lot of help from Chuck Norris.
“There are some who would have a presidential candidate describe and explain his church’s distinctive doctrines. To do so would enable the very religious test the founders prohibited in the Constitution. No candidate should become the spokesman for his faith.”
No one is asking Romney to be the spokesman for his faith. That’s not his problem. His problem is that many, especially in the party whose leadership he seeks, consider Mormonism to be a bogus religion. In fact, the prominence of the speech actually informed a great many people who were not otherwise aware of the candidate’s Mormonism, and led the Iowa press to point out the more colorful aspects of a colorful religion. …
You can read the rest of Monday Morning Quarterback on PJ Media.
Your posts are welcome in the Forum.
Read 
| Comments (59) |
I don’t know why I should listen to Oprah Winfrey. I don’t watch her show. Who cares?
I don’t know why I should listen to Oprah Winfrey. I don’t watch her show. Who cares?
That’s an awesome rally with Oprah. She makes Obama sound like a messiah.
That’s an awesome rally with Oprah. She makes Obama sound like a messiah.
I didn’t know Time Magazine called Huckabee one of the best governors in America. That’s a good ad.
I wonder what Fabian Nunez and Antonio Villaraigosa and Gavin Newsom and all the “power brokers” for Hillary think now.
How is NEVADA close for Hillary and Obama? She was 30 points ahead there. Are voters that fickle? Not that fickle is bad, or anything. lol
How is NEVADA close for Hillary and Obama? She was 30 points ahead there. Are voters that fickle? Not that fickle is bad, or anything. lol
I know from experience that Nevada presidential caucus/primary numbers can change dramatically, and fast.
Hillary’s big lead was based on name ID.
Aside from Antonio working with Kerry in 2004, they have no experience with presidential politics.
But they may have expected the race to get a lot tighter.
>Capitol Boy :
I wonder what Fabian Nunez and Antonio Villaraigosa and Gavin Newsom and all the “power brokers” for Hillary think now.
Dec 10, 2007 06:45 AM
He’s trying to let people know he’s not just Mr. Christian.
>Jonas Blane :
I didn’t know Time Magazine called Huckabee one of the best governors in America. That’s a good ad.
Dec 10, 2007 06:26 AM
Yes. Just a bit much …
>Jonas Blane :
That’s an awesome rally with Oprah. She makes Obama sound like a messiah.
Dec 10, 2007 06:23 AM
Yes. Just a bit much …
>Jonas Blane :
That’s an awesome rally with Oprah. She makes Obama sound like a messiah.
Dec 10, 2007 06:23 AM
Many people will care. Many people won’t care. It’s a celebrity endorsement, probably the best. She sure helps draw a crowd.
>marcus :
I don’t know why I should listen to Oprah Winfrey. I don’t watch her show. Who cares?
Dec 10, 2007 06:05 AM
A Bloomberg article confirming strong negative perceptions of Hillary with Democratic voters has created a nice buzz within the Republicans for Hillary krewe this morning (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=anRcoLyfN0VM).
“The concerns about Clinton, 60, a New York senator, are that she is devious, calculating and, fairly or not, a divisive figure in American politics” was the report from prominent Democratic pollster Peter Hart. Sounds like Democratic voter know she exactly the wrong prescription for a foundering political condition that needs progress and cooperation, not vindication for eight years of perceived injustices.
With Oprama surging, Republicans for Hillary might hold a crab feed fundraiser for its 501(c)4. For $10k a plate, I guarantee great food and wine (yes, Solon would get a comp). It would be a much better return than the duped Republican Electoral College measure donors received on their money.
KK,
Thanks for the comp. Look forward to it.
Must confess, however, that the thought of a Huck/Hillary fall campaign is…I mean to folks who once use to live in Arkansas’ state house…what more could the country want???
Well, now, where did I put that spare bottle of whiskey and my passport???
That’s a pretty little statehouse, you know.
With all due respect to the good folks of Arkansas, Little Rock makes Sacramento look like Paris.
Well, Obama hasn’t won it yet.
But so much for the “inevitability” of Hillary, right?
Not saying I told you, or anything like that, naturally …
>Kandy Kid :
A Bloomberg article confirming strong negative perceptions of Hillary with Democratic voters has created a nice buzz within the Republicans for Hillary krewe this morning (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=anRcoLyf N0VM).
Well, Obama hasn’t won it yet.
But so much for the “inevitability” of Hillary, right?
Not saying I told you, or anything like that, naturally …
>Kandy Kid :
A Bloomberg article confirming strong negative perceptions of Hillary with Democratic voters has created a nice buzz within the Republicans for Hillary krewe this morning (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=anRcoLyf N0VM).
Interesting to see Hillary is bringing out Wes Clark. I was wondering where he’d gone…
Bill, did you ever hear the interesting story where British General Michael Jackson (no relation) claims that Clark ordered him to start WWIII in the Kosovo War? Given the focus on Russia lately, you’d really like the story if you haven’t heard it already.
At any rate, I think it’ll be interesting to see how this plays out now that the inevitability card is out the window. Maybe room for Edwards to sneak in, maybe Hillary gets over this bump and dominates Obama after all.
Thanks for all the great blogging, Bill!
Thanks, that’s very kind.
I do know that Wes Clark story. NWN, in its e-mail guise of the time, actually predicted in real-time that a rump battalion of Russian paratroopers — commanded by a lieutenant general, which is quite unusual — moving into Kosovo would go on to attempt to occupy the principal airport, at Pristina.
Clark ordered Jackson, the NATO ground commander in theater, to send in troops via helicopter to block the Russians at the airport. Jackson refused.
In the end, there weren’t enough Russians to occupy the whole airport, so the two sides had an uneasy partition after other countries were persuaded not to allow Russia to fly in reinforcements.
Today, Russia would have the clout to get those reinforcements there.
And, oddly enough, Kosovo is about to become independent, perhaps prompting another crisis.
Since Huckabee has Wayne Dumond, his ignorance of the NIE, and now his statements on AIDS I suspect he’ll cool off – plus the Club for Growth types will go after him hard.Both Mitt and Ruidy were sinking before Guiliani’s “Sex on the City” crisis added to his other woes (Kerik, his business ties, his general unpleasantness that comes out when he doesn’t get his way) and Mitt’s Mormon woes.
I think all three are implouding. I think we’re going to see a McCain comeback. He looks more plausable than the others and more serious and grownup.
Remember in the Atomic Age, science was going to condense a three-course meal (plus a cocktail and a cigarette) into a single pill? That’s what this piece is – all the presidential news that’s fit to print, plus insightful analysis (highball and Chesterfield?). Thanks!
“most heavily-funded insurgent candidate in modern American history” – I hadn’t thought of it like that, until now. As stupid as it sounds, the Oprah thing is big deal. I had tried to calculate its value once (on here I think). Suffice to say, it’s worth several million, plus the actual endorsement, which isn’t really quantifiable.
The Huckabee ad is good. It’s the ad I thought he would run after Chuck/Huck (but he ran the Christian Conservative ad). A long time ago, I distinctly remember thinking “how can anyone run for president based on their record as governor of Arkansas? If it wasn’t for Mississippi, they’d be 50th in everything.”
from Democracy Now:
What is Blackwater’s Role in the 2008 Presidential Race?
Monday, December 10, 2007 :Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney cited Cofer Black, the former head of Counterterrorism at the CIA, as his advisor on issues involving prisoner interrogation during a recent presidential debate. Black is now the vice chairman on private military firm, Blackwater.
Meanwhile, after initially indicating it would let Blackwater’s contract expire in May, State Department officials are now raising the likelihood of a renewal. The acting head of U.S. diplomatic security, Gregory Starr, has reportedly told Blackwater it will be judged on its actions “from here on out.” That would preclude from consideration the September shooting deaths of seventeen Iraqi civilians by Blackwater guards in Baghdad.
In his latest piece for the Nation Magazine, independent journalist and Democracy Now correspondent Jeremy Scahill writes that Blackwater isn”t taking any chances on keeping its lucrative deals. Scahill says Blackwater has launched a major rebranding campaign aimed at winning new government contracts far beyond Iraq. And it”s also playing a role in the presidential race, establishing deep ties to Republican hopeful Mitt Romney.
LISTEN ONLINE
http://www.democracynow.org/2007/12/10/wha…
from Democracy Now:
What is Blackwater’s Role in the 2008 Presidential Race?
Monday, December 10, 2007 :Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney cited Cofer Black, the former head of Counterterrorism at the CIA, as his advisor on issues involving prisoner interrogation during a recent presidential debate. Black is now the vice chairman on private military firm, Blackwater.
Meanwhile, after initially indicating it would let Blackwater’s contract expire in May, State Department officials are now raising the likelihood of a renewal. The acting head of U.S. diplomatic security, Gregory Starr, has reportedly told Blackwater it will be judged on its actions “from here on out.” That would preclude from consideration the September shooting deaths of seventeen Iraqi civilians by Blackwater guards in Baghdad.
In his latest piece for the Nation Magazine, independent journalist and Democracy Now correspondent Jeremy Scahill writes that Blackwater isn”t taking any chances on keeping its lucrative deals. Scahill says Blackwater has launched a major rebranding campaign aimed at winning new government contracts far beyond Iraq. And it”s also playing a role in the presidential race, establishing deep ties to Republican hopeful Mitt Romney.
LISTEN ONLINE
http://www.democracynow.org/2007/12/10/wha…
But Mark Penn, Hillary’s chief strategist, dropped the Blackwater account …
Obama’s resources are a huge deal. Had candidates like Gary Hart had that, they would have been elected, rather than winning primaries but having no delegates slates.
As for Huckabee, I think he has a good advertising sequence.
>
“most heavily-funded insurgent candidate in modern American history” – I hadn’t thought of it like that, until now. As stupid as it sounds, the Oprah thing is big deal. I had tried to calculate its value once (on here I think). Suffice to say, it’s worth several million, plus the actual endorsement, which isn’t really quantifiable.
The Huckabee ad is good. It’s the ad I thought he would run after Chuck/Huck (but he ran the Christian Conservative ad). A long time ago, I distinctly remember thinking “how can anyone run for president based on their record as governor of Arkansas? If it wasn’t for Mississippi, they’d be 50th in everything.”
Dec 10, 2007 09:37 AM
There is a decent McCain scenario. Especially in New Hampshire.
>richard locicero :
I think all three are implouding. I think we’re going to see a McCain comeback. He looks more plausable than the others and more serious and grownup.
Dec 10, 2007 09:36 AM
“Since Huckabee has Wayne Dumond, his ignorance of the NIE, and now his statements on AIDS I suspect he’ll cool off – plus the Club for Growth types will go after him hard.”
Unless someone gets smarter about derailing him, I think Huckabee still has a lot of room to rise before he falls. Don’t underestimate LIKEABILITY in getting elected president.
“Since Huckabee has Wayne Dumond, his ignorance of the NIE, and now his statements on AIDS I suspect he’ll cool off – plus the Club for Growth types will go after him hard.”
Unless someone gets smarter about derailing him, I think Huckabee still has a lot of room to rise before he falls. Don’t underestimate LIKEABILITY in getting elected president.
His past statements tell the believers he’s really one of them, while his manner tells others he can be reasoned with.
Restore the Christian nation, that sounds scarey.
“His past statements tell the believers he’s really one of them, while his manner tells others he can be reasoned with.”
He’s a tough nut to crack
Huckabee is a better candidate than the other Reeps. Giuliani’s too mean and secretive, Romney’s too fake, McCain’s too old, Thompson’s too dead, Paul’s too crazy.
“McCain’s too old”
I’d say he’s too “pro-amnesty” for a Republican primary.
“McCain’s too old”
I’d say he’s too “pro-amnesty” for a Republican primary.
But not for a general.
Indeed. He’s still moving forward in other states.
>Brasky :
“His past statements tell the believers he’s really one of them, while his manner tells others he can be reasoned with.”
He’s a tough nut to crack
Dec 10, 2007 12:18 PM
“But not for a general.”
Agreed – his Iran and Iraq positions hurt, but he would be tough against any of the dems (tougher than Meat Romney or Fred Whathisface and maybe Giuliani too). I just don’t think he can get out of the primaries. NH – maybe he can squeeze a second place. Iowa – Huckabee has it. SC – McCain is still wounded from 2000, plus “pro-amnesty”, plus surging Huckabee. FL – either Rudy or Huckabee. He doesn’t have the resources to stick around for long without a win.
“But not for a general.”
Agreed – his Iran and Iraq positions hurt, but he would be tough against any of the dems (tougher than Meat Romney or Fred Whathisface and maybe Giuliani too). I just don’t think he can get out of the primaries. NH – maybe he can squeeze a second place. Iowa – Huckabee has it. SC – McCain is still wounded from 2000, plus “pro-amnesty”, plus surging Huckabee. FL – either Rudy or Huckabee. He doesn’t have the resources to stick around for long without a win.
I’m still intrigued about the terms under which Huckabee is against evolution.
Take a look at this story in the LA Times: Study finds humans still evolving, and quickly
http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci-evolution11dec11,0,5882337.story?coll=la-home-center
Essentially, the story says rapid dietary and disease changes are causing human genes to change more rapidly.
Studies like the one in this story are largely funded by the Federal Government through NIH.
When I think about Huckabee being against evolution, I have to assume that he’s against funding these studies… not because he’s against finding a path towards treating certain diseases but because these studies conflict with his beliefs.
Bill should run a video clip of “Inherit the Wind.”
If I can get one without it being too much trouble.
I don’t know. It’s an interesting question. My guess is he is more flexible than that.
>Juan Cortina :
I’m still intrigued about the terms under which Huckabee is against evolution.
Take a look at this story in the LA Times: Study finds humans still evolving, and quickly
[www.latimes.com/news/science/la-...]
Essen tially, the story says rapid dietary and disease changes are causing human genes to change more rapidly.
Studies like the one in this story are largely funded by the Federal Government through NIH.
When I think about Huckabee being against evolution, I have to assume that he’s against funding these studies… not because he’s against finding a path towards treating certain diseases but because these studies conflict with his beliefs.
Dec 10, 2007 04:56 PM
Actually, McCain’s position on Iraq is looking considerably better.
It’s certainly much more saleable now, for a variety of reasons.
>Brasky :
“But not for a general.”
Agreed – his Iran and Iraq positions hurt, but he would be tough against any of the dems
Actually, McCain’s position on Iraq is looking considerably better.
It’s certainly much more saleable now, for a variety of reasons.
>Brasky :
“But not for a general.”
Agreed – his Iran and Iraq positions hurt, but he would be tough against any of the dems
Many creationists acknowledge that evolution is a mechanism that is observable in the natural world, and that it can even be manipulated by Man. However, they don’t believe that Man evolved from nucleotides in the primordial soup. Huckabee opponents would do well not to blindly attack creationism, as a large number of Americans believe in aspects of it.
“Actually, McCain’s position on Iraq is looking considerably better.”
It’s not AS bad, but a large majority of Americans just want out – good news or bad news. The good news comes too late. Good news in Iraq actually breeds high expectations that we can leave – which may or not be true.
If the Bush administration hadn’t adopted the FUBAR Rebuild Iraq Plan from Day 1, who knows what could have happened – after a tough slog, we might have been able to come home by now.
Of course, if Bush hadn’t spent his post 9-11 international goodwill on Iraq, we might be celebrating our Fifth Annual “Got that Bastard Osama Day” instead.
Of course they want out of a loser war. But if it’s not a loser war, but a transformed situation thanks to cooperation from Iran, well, that is another matter.
The NIE is a transformative event.
Barsky – I know many Southern Baptist and have a clear understanding of their thoughts on evolution. Many deny that dinosaurs existed and think earth is only as old as man.
Many American’s may believe in elements of creationism but that isn’t the question I’m asking. I’m wondering how opposed to evolution can a Presidential candidate be in the U.S.?
Can he be opposed enough to divert important scientific research funding to projects supporting creationist theory?