As I will report in the Blue Radar tomorrow morning, the polls in New Hampshire have changed dramatically over the last week. According to , a poll to be released later this weekend will show a significant drop in support for Hillary Clinton, who had led in that state by 20 points in some surveys. The change makes New Hampshire a three-way race between Hillary, Obama and Edwards.
If you think the "authenticity" issue is hurting Hillary Clinton now, just wait until the general election.
For Hillary, Edwards and Obama, Iowa is anybody's race to win. A new shows that each of them are in contention:
Iowa Democrats (likely caucus-goers)
Hillary Clinton - 28% Barack Obama - 25% John Edwards - 21%
Now to the next part -- and this is where is gets mighty interesting. According to caucus rules, if after a precinct votes a candidate receives less than 15% of the vote, all the individuals who voted for that candidate must either forfeit their vote or support a candidate above the 15% threshold.
At the moment, it seems like in almost every precinct only Hillary, Obama and Edwards will be above the 15% threshold. So it all comes down to which candidate Biden, Richardson, Dodd, Gravel and Kucinich supporters will switch their votes to. Here are the results:
First Choice Only
Including Second Choices of Those Who First Backed Unviables
Clinton
28%
30%
Obama
25%
29%
Edwards
21%
27%
Not Sure
12%
15%
In other words, we are all tied up in Iowa. Just to note, according to Zogby, John Edwards was able to make up the most ground because most Biden and Richardson supporters jumped to his side.
Iowa is a very important state because it will determine whether Hillary Clinton runs away with the nomination. If Obama or Edwards win, the race will move to New Hampshire, where independent voters make up of the electorate. These independents will need to make a decision: Democratic ballot or Republican ballot? They can only pick one.
Political wisdom suggests that if Obama or Edwards win Iowa (especially in Obama's case), a flood of New Hampshire independents will vote in the Democratic contest because they will want to see Hillary go down. If McCain loses big in Iowa, even more registered New Hampshire independents will want to vote in the Democratic race, fearing that McCain is done and there is no point in filling out a Republican ballot.
This is all good news for Obama and Edwards. But there is one variable they are leaving out: the Ron Paul factor.
Earlier this week, Ron Paul raked in in just 24 hours. If this keeps up, he will be able to increase his campaign resources in early states, including Iowa. If Paul finishes as high as third in Iowa, he will become the media darling overnight, and be labeled as the independent maverick Republican (?). Obama or Edwards, should they win Iowa, could count on significantly less independents crossing over to help beat Hillary in New Hampshire. Plus, Ron Paul is basing his campaign in New Hampshire more than anywhere else. He will attract a lot of independents -- keeping them from voting for Hillary's number one competitor.
Whether Obama or Edwards put up a fight in New Hampshire will depend on the attractiveness of Ron Paul to independent voters.
Over the last two months, as Obama has sounded more long-winded, and as John Edwards has transformed into a more authentic leader, I have struggled with this question.
Who should us non-Hillary Democrats endorse: Edwards or Obama? Many of us just wish they would join forces, or one would simply drop out of the race. Most of their supporters share the same concerns about Hillary Clinton -- that she is indebted to the Washington establishment, does not say what she really thinks, uses wedge issues to divide voters, and would cause hardcore conservative voters to rally against the Democratic Party during the general election season.
These two videos from the Edwards Campaign pretty much sum up my personal distaste towards Hillary:
It is in Hillary's interest that these two candidates split the votes in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. However, if Hillary loses the nomination, it will be because one of these two candidates fizzled while the other surged ahead. The longer we hesitate on a decision, the less of an opportunity we will have as concerned citizens to make a difference in the Iowa Caucus.
And also, if you are doubting the impact of blogs, that skepticism might be mildly true about general elections. But when it comes to primaries, blogs have a proven history of making a difference. Ned Lamont beat Joe Lieberman in the Connecticut Senate primary because of the netroots. Each of us can make a difference this time around. What we have staring us in the eye is the most important Democratic nomination since 1968. We must get involved in any way possible to prevent eight more years of closed government. If Hillary wins the nomination, there will be nothing we can do other than endorsing a Democrat to run against her in 2012, who would surely lose. Are we going to wait until 2016, or are we going to actively participate in this discussion?
Who should it be: Edwards or Obama?
I am introducing this issue today because in exactly one week, the Democrats will take to the stage in the last presidential debate until December 10th. This is absolutely huge. We will need to watch both candidates closely, and evaluate them. What are their strengths and weaknesses, and how will those traits impact their ability to beat Hillary? Both of them would make great presidents. But we can only pick one.
So if any of you have an initial opinion, then comment on this post. In the meantime, all of us will keep a watchful eye on the two in next week's debate. Every few days, I will readdress this issue as objectively as I can so that all of us 'regulars' can make an informed decision.
Today, The John Edwards for President Campaign released a video of Hillary Clinton's responses during the latest presidential debate. You have got to watch this! Now you know why so many progressives don't even have a clue what she stands for:
And you think Republicans won't expose this in the general election? What I'm trying to do between now and February 5th is do my part to prevent an eventual train wreck for the Democrats in the general election. Whether the answer is Edwards or Obama is still up in the air. One thing is for sure: we need to pick one of those two candidates, and help that candidate defeat Hillary in the primaries. I do not want another long and painful eight years. My guess is that none of you want that either.
This is it. On the same day the Federal Elections Commission that John Edwards was eligible for public funds, he kicked off the last leg of his push to become the Democratic nominee. He is now spending big in Iowa on television ads geared at establishing himself as the alternative to Hillary Clinton.
In the first TV ad of this major push, Edwards bought an entire minute of airtime to highlight two major themes:
This campaign is not about him, it's about middle class voters with needs.
Democrats must show backbone for a change.
This is significant because although Edwards has focused his money on Iowa, until now his campaign had yet to air one ad in the state. It is not some weird coincidence that he waited until the beginning of November to launch his first television spot. This is definitely the beginning of a huge push on his part in the remaining two months.
When asked point blank, Edwards thinks he is because Obama and Hillary began showing ads months ago:
Asked last month while campaigning in Davenport, Iowa, about trailingHillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama in state and national polls, hesaid it was because they had spent more money on television advertisingthan he did.
In a few weeks we will know for sure whether these television ads, coupled with his excellent debate performance, made a difference in the polls.
When you say, "Look how great it was during the 90s," and then refuse to release your records from that time, you cannot expect to get off easy. On immigration, on Iraq, Iran and Social Security, both John Edwards and Barack Obama finally took a stand. As I write this, many of the pundits are writing that Obama won the debate. I would say that overall John Edwards got the edge -- although barely. He was much more forceful, and came across as the more charismatic one. Obama was strong as well, and had a moment when he physically turned towards Clinton and accused her of doublespeak. Both Edwards and Obama were very strong. Hillary Clinton played rope-a-dope, and survived only because of how far ahead she is in the polls.
Here's my debate rankings:
John Edwards: The line directed at Hillary, "We should be in tell the truth mode," pretty much summed up how Edwards confronted Hillary without hesitation.
Barack Obama: Close, but not first place. Took Hillary to task on Social Security, the former First Lady's double-talk on immigration and schooled her on Iran.
Dennis Kucinich: As one commenter on this site wrote, if Barack Obama took the positions that Kurinich took in this debate (with the exception of the UFO answer), he would be winning in the polls.
Hillary Clinton: Clearly on the defensive the entire time. Not an implosion. But her Washington establishment roots and history of lying was exposed.
Chris Dodd: Much stronger than his other debate performances -- but that's not really saying much.
Joe Biden: Nothing doing there.
Bill Richardson: Not really impressive at all. He defended Hillary Clinton, which was not smart because he needed to create a distinction with her.
One more note. You can thank Hillary Clinton and all the other Senators who voted for the Iran bill for the recent spike in oil.
Welcome to 's coverage of the Halloween week Democratic debate from Philadelphia, which runs two hours. We are experiencing temporary difficulties with our chat window, and do apologize. As a last ditch effort, I will live blog it. Just keep pressing refresh for updates. Feel free to comment as well:
And so concludes our live blog. Sorry again about the chat window not working. But we made the most out of it. We will definitely fix those technical difficulties beforehand next time. SO WHO WON THE DEBATE?
11:02: Barack Obama will be Mitt Romney for Halloween.
10:58: Why is Russert asking if there is life on other planets?
10:57: Kucinich says he saw a UFO (No joke!)
10:55: Obama and Edwards are double-teaming Hillary on the former First Lady's answer about drivers licenses for illegal immigrants.
10:50: Obama on air travel: "This is a problem that has been building for a long time" ever since deregulation took place. "Anyone that has been flying commercial has known that service has gone down."
10:47: Obama says the reimbursement systemz for Medicaid and Medicare are not working properly.
10:40: Pretty much every candidate feels that children need to go to school longer. Edwards proposed that children's health care should be free.
10:33: KUCINICH: It is time for the Democrats to move on the issue of impeachment.
10:22: The moderators are now focusing almost entirely on domestic issues. Each of the candidates are given 30 seconds.
10:18: Edwards explained that America can be patriotic about other things in America besides war.
10:17: Edwards says he would use the arm of the Justice Department to investigate price-gouging on the part of oil companies.
10:12: They are on their second of two commercial breaks.
10:11: Obama says he is not fearful of Mitt Romney's swift boating of Obama's name.
10:09: Clinton claims there is little difference between herself and Obama on Social Security. However, there actually is a difference. Obama wants to raise the Social Security tax cap from $97,000 to $200,000.
10:07: Obama accuses Clinton is giving convoluted answers on Social Security. OBAMA: "I am not fearful to have a debate about this (social security) with Rudolph Giuliani."
10:01: Biden is slamming Giuliani, saying that he is not qualified to be president. As far as what Giuliani ever talkes about, it's always "a noun, a verb and 9/11."
9:59: Edwards again was strong, saying that we are not going to look our children in the eye and hand this mess over to them.
9:51: Edwards had a few great lines -- confronting Clinton on her defense industry connections. Furthermore, Edwards courageously said that the 2008 race isn't about any of them. It is about the next generation of children being better off than their parents. Excellent!
9:49: I just got back into the room as Obama laid the smack down on Hillary for not releasing records, and prolonging the secrecy of the Bush Administration. And then now Edwards is laying into her. Edwards says that if you want the status quo, then vote for Clinton.
9:39: Commercial intermission. I'm taking a quick break.
9:38: CLINTON: "I stand for ending the war in Iraq, and bringing our troops home." (That's spin.)
9:36: EDWARDS: "We should be in tell the truth mode." Edwards is really slamming Clinton!
9:34: CLINTON: "We've got to get the Iraqi government to understand its obligations, because there is no military solution."
9:31: Kucinich calls for the US to fully participate in the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.
9:30: Richardson wants an international agreement that we use diplomacy first. RICHARDSON: "I went head-to-head with Saddam Hussein. ...I've done it (diplomacy)."
9:28: Chris Dodd says Pakistan more dangerous than Iran, especially if Pakistan falls.
9:26: BIDEN: "President's make wise decisions" based on "the situation they find themselves in the world."
9:24: CLINTON: "I intend to do everything I can to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear bomb." She was then challenged by Russert.
9:23: KUCINICH: "We need to reject" war against Iran. "There is no basis for it whatsoever....When you say all options are on the table, you are licensing President Bush." (Excellent, Kucinich!!!)
9:21: RICHARDSON: "I am the only one up on this stage that has negotiated with a foreign country." Kucinich interrupted in response, "That's not true."
9:19: Edwards slamming Clinton, asking, "Has anyone read this thing?" -- pertaining to the Iran vote.
9:18: Clinton is defending her Iran vote, saying that it gives Bush "carrots and sticks" to confront Iran.
9:18: CLINTON: "We will not permit him (Bush) to go take offensive action against Iran."
9:16: OBAMA: "This kind of resolution (Iran war resolution) sends the wrong message" to the world.
9:15: BIDEN: The Administration's actions have "driven underground every moderate in Afghanistan and Pakistan."
Amid rumors that Barack Obama will challenge Hillary Clinton on the issues of health care and lobbyist dependency, the Clinton team is the imminent offensive:
“It’s unfortunate that Senators Obama and Edwards have decided torevive their campaigns by abandoning the politics of hope,†said herspokesman, Phil Singer, adding, “But Senator Clinton isn’t doinganything out of the ordinary to get ready for this debate.â€
Abandoning the politics of hope? As for Hillary, her campaign seems to be embracing the politics of calculation.
Though the national polls show a Hillary landslide in the making, Iowa is still a very close race. This new poll of 306 likely Democratic caucus-goers finds that Obama still could win the state. As for Edwards, he is beginning to fall behind, despite the fact that over the weekend he became the first candidate in either party to .
Here are the :
Likely Iowa Caucus Voters
Hillary Clinton - 29% Barack Obama - 27% John Edwards - 20% Bill Richardson - 7% Joe Biden - 5%
/- 5.8%
If Hillary Clinton rolls through Iowa, nothing will stop her from winning the nomination -- mark my words. With that said, Iowa is still very much up in the air. Remember, with three weeks to go before the vote in 2004, John Kerry trailed in third place. But as points out, Clinton is much more disciplined than Howard Dean:
Clinton is no Howard Dean. In fact, she may be the most disciplinedpolitician I have ever seen. She's a machine, always on message,relentlessly perfect on everything -- appearance, message, and policy.It's that discipline that has allowed her to fool people into thinkingshe'd pull all of our troops out of Iraq and that her vote on Iranwasn't REALLY as horrible as it really was.
She won't make a mistake. She will not implode. She's too good tomake the obvious mistake, and even if she erred (she's human, so we canassume), her campaign wouldn't waste any time setting things straight.
It truly comes down to whether voters in Iowa will be fooled by machine-style politics, or whether they look beyond the inevitability factor and select a candidate based on substance.
In tomorrow's debate, Obama and Edwards will need to go on the offensive. No more playing around. If they are unable to be more disciplined in their message, we are looking at a Clinton primary landslide.
(We invite all of you to join us for the live chat during tomorrow's MSNBC debate, which begins at 9 PM ET/6 PM PT.)
Recent Comments