Tag: 2008 (page 35)

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll taken July 21 finds Hillary Clinton with a double-digit lead over other contenders. The poll results are here.

I think it's significant that those responding also gave her a double-digit lead when asked which candidate would mostly likely win in the general election:

Now, thinking ahead to November 2008: Which Democratic presidential candidate do you think has the best chance to defeat the Republican nominee in the general election? (Read list if necessary.)

Hillary Clinton 43
Barack Obama 27
John Edwards 9
Al Gore 7
Bill Richardson 1
Chris Dodd 1
Joe Biden *
Dennis Kucinich *
Mike Gravel *
Other *
None of these 4
No opinion 7

As for Al Gore, he scored 14 when asked who those polled favored now, but only 9 when asked who was most likely to defeat Republicans.

Hillary is also getting major support on her Iraq stance right now.

She has a 51 percent to 29 percent lead over Obama among those in favor of a complete, immediate withdrawal.

Oprah Winfrey is opening up her Santa Barbara estate to throw an exclusive, ultra high end fundraiser for Barack Obama.

A ticket in the door starts at $2,300, the most allowable under federal campaign laws. If you want to stick around for a VIP reception — mingling with a list of yet-to-be announced celebs — better be prepared to raise at least $25,000 from friends, family and a few high-class strangers. For $50,000, you can stay for dinner (and wander through the house while searching for a bathroom).

One invitee is positively giddy over the event.

More...

Hillary Clinton, on the campaign trail with Bill in Iowa today, tore into President Bush's commutation of Scooter Libby. She told the Associated Press:

"I believe that presidential pardon authority is available to any president, and almost all presidents have exercised it," Clinton told the AP. "This (the Libby decision) was clearly an effort to protect the White House. ... There isn't any doubt now, what we know is that Libby was carrying out the implicit or explicit wishes of the vice president, or maybe the president as well, in the further effort to stifle dissent."

She also released this statement:

"Today's decision is yet another example that this Administration simply considers itself above the law. This case arose from the Administration's politicization of national security intelligence and its efforts to punish those who spoke out against its policies. Four years into the Iraq war, Americans are still living with the consequences of this White House's efforts to quell dissent. This commutation sends the clear signal that in this Administration, cronyism and ideology trump competence and justice."

Hillary also distinguished the Clinton pardons from the Scooter commutation:

Her husband's pardons, issued in the closing hours of his presidency, were simply routine exercise in the use of the pardon power, and none were aimed at protecting the Clinton presidency or legacy, she said.

Elizabeth Edwards called in to Hardball this afternoon to tell off the She-Pundit with Long Blond Hair.

Shorter version: Elizabeth rocked, the she-pundit did not.

Crooks and Liars (of course) and Think Progress have the video. From Think Progress:

During an hour-long interview with Coulter today on MSNBC, host Chris Matthews announced that Elizabeth Edwards was on the line. Edwards referenced the attacks above, saying, “I’m the mother of that boy who died. These young people behind you…you’re asking them to participate in a dialogue that is based on hatefulness and ugliness instead of on the issues, and I don’t think that’s serving them or this country very well.” The live audience cheered.

When her first two attempts to spin the situation faulted, Coulter then launched into another baseless, personal attack, accusing John Edwards of “bankrupting doctors by giving a shyster Las Vegas routine in front of juries…doing these psychic routines in front of illiterate juries to bankrupt doctors who now can’t deliver babies.”

Think Progress also has the transcript, reprinted here below the fold:

Jeffrey Toobin, writing in the New Yorker, explains why 2008 will determine not just our President and congressional officials, but the future of the Supreme Court for the next several decades.

He examines the rulings in the first full term in which Justices Alito and Roberts participated. He notes that the conservative controversial opinions were decided by votes of 5 to 4. And that Justice Stevens is 87 years old and Ruth Gader Ginsberg is 74. But Alito and Roberts are only in their 50's.

Since Souter and Kennedy, all appointed Justices -- Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Roberts, and Alito —- have fulfilled the agenda of the Presidents who appointed them. No surprises.

I agree with Toobin who concludes his excellent article with:

At this moment, the liberals face not only jurisprudential but actuarial peril. Stevens is eighty-seven and Ginsburg seventy-four; Roberts, Thomas, and Alito are in their fifties. The Court, no less than the Presidency, will be on the ballot next November, and a wise electorate will vote accordingly.

Barack Obama said he was going to avoid negative campaign attacks. However, his campaign just made one against Hillary Clinton.

The New York Times reports that the Clintons recently divested themselves of their stocks held in a blind trust (meaning the stocks were chosen by trustees and they were not allowed to be advised of which stocks they were holding) to avoid any allegations of conflict of interest.

When Hillary became a presidential candidate, regulations required her to dissolve the blind trust so that she would know what stocks she held.

Once she learned what they were, she and Bill decided to liquidate them all, even though by doing so they will have to pay hefty capital gains taxes.

More...

How much does a major Hollywood endorsement help a presidential candidate? I don't know, but if it does, Hillary Clinton just scored a major win by getting the backing of Director and mogul Steven Spielberg.

Influential filmmaker and philanthropist Steven Spielberg today announced that he is officially endorsing Hillary Clinton for President. Spielberg said that he has chosen to endorse Clinton because of her experience and strength.

“I’ve taken the time to familiarize myself with the impressive field of Democratic candidates and am convinced that Hillary Clinton is the most qualified candidate to lead us from her first day in the White House,” Spielberg said. “Hillary is a strong leader and is respected the world over. As president, she will bring America back together, rebuild our prestige abroad and ensure our protection here at home.”

In what I envision as true mogul ego style, one paragraph of the endorsement contains quotes about Hillary and the rest is about Spielberg's accomplishments and career. One would think he's the candidate.

Nonetheless, good for Hillary. He's a big fish.

Update: Gore staffers deny the report.

*******

The Telegraph reports that former Gore aides have met in secret and been queried on whether they'd come to work for him if he decided to enter the presidential race.

....aware that he may step into the wide open race for the White House, former strategists are sounding out a shadow team that could run his campaign at short notice. In approaching former campaign staff, including political strategists and communications officials, they are making clear they are not acting on formal instructions from Mr Gore, 59, but have not been asked to stop.

One of his former campaign team said: "I was asked whether I would be available towards the end of the year if I am needed. They know he has not ruled out running and if he decides to jump in, he will have to move very fast. "He hasn't asked them to do this, but nor has he told them not to."

Former President Clinton also suggested on Larry King Live last week that Gore might run.

I disagree with those who think the nomination is his for the asking. Plus, I really don't want him to run. I'm happy with the candidates already in the running, particularly Hillary and John Edwards.

More...

For some time, there has been a meme in political discourse indicating that Republicans choose their Presidential candidates based on some notion of whose "turn" it is to win the nomination.  I have found evidence of this meme from both the right (William F. Buckley) and the left (a MyDD commenter).  Given the pervasiveness of this meme, I decided to test the historical evidence behind it by examining Republican presidential nominations from 1960 -- a full twelve years before the first election in which primaries played a deciding role in the delegate count -- through 2004.

According to most versions of this theory, there are three ways that one establishes one's "turn" in line: 1) by being a sitting or former Vice President; 2) by running in a previous year, losing but doing better than expected; or 3) by attaining some sort of formal institutional leadership, i.e., serving as Senate Minority Leader or Speaker of the House.  I aim to show that criterion #1 is both natural and common to both parties, and that criteria #2 and #3 are simply not the hard-and-fast rules they have been made out to be.  In fact, in the past twelve election cycles, there has been only one instance where a Republican presidential primary was decided by anything close to the concept of "turn," and even in that instance the outcome was far from certain until well down the stretch.  Essentially, the Republican presidential "turn" is a myth with no predictive value for the 2008 GOP primary.

Just another sign the John McCain candidacy is in trouble:

Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record)'s troubled presidential campaign is eliminating some non-senior staff positions and cutting some consultants' contracts.

The Arizona senator's campaign characterized the moves as "minor adjustments" that are part of an overall effort to revamp its fundraising office and budgeting operation.

I have to say I never considered him a serious contender. The battle will be between Rudy Giuliani and Mitch Romney. If Giulani shoots himself in the foot, which I expect he will, Newt Gingrich may step in.

I also don't think Tommy Thompson or Fred Thompson stand a chance. But it's still early. Can another Republican candidate emerge?

Noting she has the same initials as the Human Rights Campaign, in an unpublicized speech Friday, Hillary Clinton offered gays a partnership in her Administration.

She also opposed "Don't Ask, Don't tell" for gays serving in the military, as do John Edwards and Barack Obama.

The group hasn't yet decided whom to endorse, and like many of us, won't for some time.

As to being closed to the press:

A young feminist writing at Alternet today says she's torn about voting for Hillary. Her feminist self tells her she should, while politically, she's not sure.

I don't think feminism requires one to to vote for a female candidate. People should vote for the candidate they view as most qualified -- the person they believe is best suited for the job.

It would be a milestone and an achievement to have a woman President. I've frequently said that I think Hillary is more than up to the task.

But, if I decide to support Hillary, it won't be because she's a woman. It will be because I think she's the best choice to lead our country, based upon her experience, intelligence and position on issues -- all issues, not female issues.

No one owes Hillary a vote because she's female. I'm glad she's running. I'm glad a woman is running. But it will be Hillary the candidate not Hillary the woman that sways me in the end if I decide to support her.