Yes, it's time for self-reflection among the pundit corps who made collective fools of themselves by (1) putting blind faith in polling and (2) then repeating each other in the pundit echo chamber of frenzied, poll-driven logic. My main mistake wasn't in predictions (which I didn't and don't make: I don't need to go out of my way to make a fool out of myself. I do it naturally) but in underestimating (and not reporting) what I knew to be true. Let me count a few ways. (1) The deep strength of the Clinton ground organization which was pushed to the hilt by the Obama folks; (2) forgetting what I knew to be true, namely the depth of popularity and support for Hillary Clinton (and the Clinton name) among Democrats; (3) The support of New Hampshire's Democratic political establishment which happens to be strongly populated; and (4) Hillary Clinton will go to the brink to get every vote (see the 30-minute canvassing session in Manchester on Sunday that drew large media attention and did much to bolster her reputation as someone who would not outworked.) There will be plenty of talk about the trail of tears to victory (which did have the effect of changing the camapign narrative) but the reality is that Hillary Clinton earned every vote -- and did a great job of baiting the media to make her a canddiate under seige.

That said, it was a remarkable, tight race that essentially came down to maybe a dozen wards in Manchester and Nashua. Both candidates left New Hampshire strong (not so much for John Edwards whom the Obama no doubt wish would get the hell out of the way) and I believe New Hampshire will be prelude to the major struggle down the road -- one which will be good for voters, the candidates, and the nominating process. Most important of all, it will make for a great story.

More on that later.

Apologies -- Last night I had software and Internet issues and was unable to update the blog as the night went along. I was at the Obama victory rally that wasn't and it was interesting to see some 500 media people relaize in unison they were likely in the wrong place. The hard-earned victory party was up the road in Manchester.

Posted by Michael McCord at 02:14 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

NEGATIVE NO WORK -- For the second week in a row, Mitt Romney, who spent the most money and ran the most negative ads, lost. A coincidence? Romney was pleased to win another silver. M cCain was pleased to win because between the two it was personal. Romney was too glib about torture and Guantanamo Bay and the consequences of such cheap talk.

APPREHENSION? -- With around 17 percent in, Clinton is leading 40 to 35 percent. It's a little quiet at the Obama rally where security is incredibly tight.

MCCAIN MANIA -- MSNBC called it for McCain at around 8:10 p.m. This is a remarkable comeback from a guy who was given up as politically dead six to seven months ago. This could be the double digit vicotry of the night. Clinton and Obama are too close too call. McCain -- I covered him making trips to office board rooms and VFW halls with fewer that 50 folks.

CHIT-CHAT -- It's 8:05 and the talking heads on MSNBC have been furiously chatting up Barack Obama and questioning the existence of Hillary Clinton -- which could be good news for Obama given they have reems of exit poll info they are waiting to show off as soon as possible. Early early returns (11 percent) show Clinton over Obama by a 38 to 36 percent margin with Edwards lagging behind considerably. The Edwards folks sent out an odd primary day release focused on a smoky "firewall" in hopes it would prove prophetic that Hillary would go down in flames. It was a funny focus to say the least -- and I guess about the only strategy they may have left despite a herculean effort by Edwards.
John McCain has a bigger lead over Mitt Romney. He's also superstitious -- he's holding his primary night rally at the same hotel in Nashua he had in 2000 when he won...even the same ballroom.

(earlier)
HAMPTON FALLS FAMILY AFFAIR -- It was an exciting primary day for Kate Spoto of Hampton Falls. Her 18-year-old twin daughters Angela and Sarah were voting for the first time and they were doing with mom. Democratic contender Barack Obama swept away the Spoto family (the father was away on a business and voted by absentee ballot). Angela told me she voted Obama because of his inclusive approach -- "I like how he trusts the people." Kate said she had some concerns about Obama's epxerience but believed the "force of his vision" was more important. Of equal importance, she told me, was voting for somebody (as opposed to against somebody) and being able to share that enthusiasm with her daughters. She supported John Kerry in 2004 "just because I didn't like Bush."
Hampton Falls town moderator John Shaw said he called in for more ballots in the predominantly Republican town. "It's been a pretty steady flow," Shaw told me but he wasn't sure yet whether the town would have a record turnout -- he was still waiting for later afternoon surges to come.
Another young voter, 20-year-old Casey Roe was holding a John Edwards sign.The American University student had met Edwards a couple of times and she supported him because "he's the only talking about coproate greed" and his environmental policies which are most important to her. She said that Clinton and Obama were still supportive of nuclear power and liquified coal and that Edwards strongly opposed both. She said Obama was "inspirational" but have enough "substance" to get her support.
(earlier)
DEDICATED IN GREENLAND -- I stopped by the very busy voting place in Greenland and ran across signholders Michael Fitzgerald (big McCain sign) and Shay Lavery (smaller Romney sign with an accompanying red hand "Mitt" adornment) who had been standing around almost five hours since 7:30 a.m. Fitzgerald was with Veterans for McCain and supported McCain in 2000. "He'll be the real comeback kid this year," Fitzgerald said of McCain's campaign. "It's all about character. He got killed on immigration but stood his ground. He's at his best when he's fighting." For Lavery, immigration was was her top issue and she believed Romney's successful management experience left him best equipped to make the changes necessary to accomplish immigration reform.
ODD SIGHT -- Never seen this one before: campaign signs sagging in melting snow.
(earlier)
Shameless promotion department: For those early risers I will do my pundit best to explain the results tomorrow at 7 a.m. on Comcast Channel 8.
(earlier)
The primary campaign is over and voting has begun -- with the best primary day weather I've ever seen. People have asked me for months who do I think will win on the Democratic and Republican primaries. I have always declined to answer though I did hit this repeat button often -- despite press obituaries to the contrary, John McCain was not a dead man walking candidate (lessons learned from 2000) and nothing was inevtiable (see Clinton, Hillary).
I subscribe to the old Hollywood mantra of "nobody knows anything" until the votes have been tallied. While I have no shortage of opinions, I don't make predictions of victory or defeat. I will share some trends I will be watching for today and tonight:
1) Obama mania -- It's real but how big is it? The energy of the Obama crowds is far different than those of those Clinton audiences (which have also been augmented with outsiders trucked in from out of state). Not better or worse, just very different with different messages to different audiences. If Iowa was prelude, that excitement could translate into buckets of votes not only from young voters but across the board. If the expected record primary turnout does happen, it will likely benefit Obama most of all. The most energizing candidate almost always brings out the vote.
2) If independents break heavy for Obama, McCain will be for a vote-for-vote slugfest with Mitt Romney. As with Clinton, I don't underestimate his organizational heft which is up against McCain's passionates brigades.
3) The Republicans will be in turmoil no matter what happens. Maybe Rudy Giuliani is smart to play coy with Iowa and NH -- and Newt Gingrich may be having visions of glory.
4) It's sad to see Hillary and Bill Clinton go dark with threats of Al Queda bombings and buyer's remorse if Obama wins. It's undignified for some Democrats to rip a page out of the Karl Rove toxic playbook (remember the 'Wolve in the woods' ad slamming John Kerry as national security sissy in 2004) and play the fear card. It looks desperate -- perhaps it is desperate. Is that what she means by being a 'doer, not a talker'?
5) Nothing will be settled by today's results.
6) Can Ron Paul translate national Internet enthusiasm and fund-raising prowess into votes?
7) Will there be a continuation of the grass roots energy generated by the stunning 2006 Congressional victories of Paul Hodes and Carol Shea-Porter? If so, it can only hope Obama whom they both support.
8) This has been the most fascinating primary I have have the opportunity and honot to cover. I have been impressed by the desire of voters to articulate their concerns and hopes. I've been lucky to see almost all of candidates, talk to them, and see them with voters.

Posted by Michael McCord at 09:36 AM| Permalink | Comments (0)

While in the midst of another John Edwards 36-hour marathon, the Edwards brain trust laid out its plans in a conference call to reporters this afternoon and their message was simple -- Hey Hillary, don't let the (campaign) door hit you on the way out. As if Clinton needs more trouble (almost all poll trends are looking, well, not helpful), the Edwards campaign is spreading the word that a defeat here could seal her doom (funny, the Drudge report also had a similar non-attributed report about 'turmoil' in the Clinton campaign and the sharpening of the knives by the Edwards folks) and render her irrelevant. It was a good example of pre-pre-spin. The Edwards folks are trumpeting the amount of folks supporting him in Iowa that they didn't even know about (as many as 40,000 they claim) -- and are banking on a repeat of that here in first-in-the-galaxy primary land tomorrow while celebrating rising poll numbers nationally. They believe that "change" will rule the land again and they hammered her for being essentially a paid subsidiary of the oil/defense/pharmaceutical and goodness knows how many other industries (funny, they had barely a thing to say about Barack Obama -- but then their goal is to get into a change showdown with Obama.)
On the Democratic side, few can escape the Clinton orbit. Edwards is expected to end his latest statewide sprint tonight in Dover -- at the same Elks Lodge that Bill Clinton made his famous 'till the last dog" speech in 1992. When I asked if there was a coincidence, I was advised not to read too much into it. O.K. I won't but I still find it interesting.

I'm traveling north to Rochester to see the Iowa victors Mike Huckabee and Barack Obama in the same town around the same time.

(earlier with P.S.)
At the risk of piling on but here goes anyway -- It's rare to see a seasoned politician and campaigner dance mostly to the tune of another one but watching Hillary Clinton take up the banner of change -- as a reflexive gesture, like the sign of the cross against a vampire, against her rival Democratic rival Barack Obama -- can be instructive. When the Clinton campaign shifts into theme mode it is a sight to behold -- surrogates, staffers and the candidate begin speaking in a numbing unison to fight back perceived or real threats against her candidacy -- as I witnessed last night in Hampton at a campaign rally in which she pulled out all the stops. I've said for months the Clintonites had misinterpreted and underestimated Obama's rhetorical gifts of persuation and visionary narrative -- and in doing so they misread the mood of the voters. They are rightly outraged that Obama gets away with being vague of about policy details -- but that's her strength not his. Perhaps given the unprecendented mess the next president faces, he doesn't want to get bogged in policy specifics. Perhaps there's less than than meets the eye. They and perhaps many voters find his sermons on hope and change too much to stomach. But I've seen during this crazy primary season that voters are responding to the "we" far more than candidates speaking "I, I, I."

Watching her drink the change kool aid and spit it back out looks forced and anemic, another example of poll-driven insertions that dull an otherwise lively mind and unparallelled gift to dechipher what's wrong and offer solutions. She can wear an audience down with her detailed answers. When she says "I'm a doer and not a talker" she can make a good case of accomplishment. But she has slipped on so many suits in the campaign (experience, leadership, accomplishment, change) that you never know what's going to come up. In comparison, Obama has had the advantage of being annoyingly consistent with his few themes.
Going after Obama for his legislative votes is fair game but the hypocrisy is almost comical given the depth of lobbyist money and influence in her campaign -- and as I learned in Iowa, talk about Iraq war can be toxic because voters there told me they haven't fogotten the war or her war authorization vote in 2002. To accuse Obama of voting to fund the troops already in a war she supported at the beginning was rich enough to give me intellectual heartburn. Their latest dagger is a 'Obama as a potential George W. Bush in the making' (you know, no experience and without experience you can't have change is the latest formula) and it's an embarrassing howler. It's also a sign of desperation -- Bush was the most ill-experienced, least traveled, most coddled and uncurious president possibly ever. If Clinton can't tell the difference, what does that say about her judgment?

P.S. -- Perhaps it's a slight case of paranoia on my part but last night at the Clinton event in Hampton, a very tall man carrying a Clinton sign kept walking along the ropes of the media area, staring at reporters and then walking away before returning a short time later. When I made eye contact with him he smiled a not-reassuring smile and turned around. I know the popular wisdom among the Clinton supporters is that we are all secret Hillary bashers -- perhaps this guy was carrying a media voodoo doll?

Posted by Michael McCord at 06:46 AM| Permalink | Comments (1)

Less than 48 hours to before the voters head to the polls and the good weather is sending thousands of voters to campaign events across the state -- leading to traffic jam and overflow rooms filled with supporters and the curious wanting to see what all the fuss is about. I heard the Hillary Clinton event in Nashua today drew as well if not better than Barack Obama's there yesterday. I was at the Barack Obama stop at Exeter High School which thankfully started an hour or so late (I had a leisurely adventure around the exeter area finding the old high school before finally getting on track -- looking at the fine print on Google maps would have helped.)

It was packed, an estimated 2,500 or that included an overflow with folks cheering at a, ah, loudpseaker. They were there to hear and see the post-Iowa caucus winning Obama who seems to really hitting a new gear with a stump speech that evolves and morphs (by comparison, he was rather the policy-listing plodder with his early efforts when the campaign launched less than a year ago). He got this crowd juiced numerous times and possibly best of all when mentioning that George W. Bush or his 'cousin' Dick Cheney wouldn't be on the ballot in November -- and, I wrote in my notes, when he talked about respecting the Constitution("very loud cheer"). Obama said he was going after the undecided voter and he may have persuaded a few or many or many more (Tuesday will tell whether he made the sale.)
One of those undecideds was Lydia Blume, an enthusiastic Democrat from York, Maine who didn't hesitate when I asked why she was interested in Obama (Blume will take part in the Maine caucuses next month -- which alas won't get as much love, respect and adoration as Iowa; it's all in the batting order). "This is the key: he's pushing change from the ground up," said Blume who is part of an emerging organization called Seacoast Democrats (based in York) that is attempting to do exactly what Obama advocates. Blume, who brought her young daughter Sophia Eytel to Exeter High (new motto: It's a long walk up the driveway). She told me the young and growing group is self-created and inspired by the frustration and promise of the 2004 and 2006 elections. Obama probably didn't disappoint her especially when he talked "Americans are the agents of change."

I'm off to see Hillary Clinton in Hampton in a short while.

Poll Fever
They are coming fast and furious and you can find what you want in each of them. The Concord Monitor/Research 2000 poll released yesterday has a tight Dem race with Obama 34 percent, Clinton 33 percent, and Edwards 23 on the Dem side; for the GOP, John McCain led Mitt Romney by a 35 to percent margin with Mike Huckabee at 13 percent. The latest CNN/WMUR poll had Clinton and Obama tied at 33 percent with Edwards at 20 percent. John McCain also topped the Republican race with a 35 to 29 percent lead over Mitt Romney and Rudy giuliani at 14 percent. The Franklin Pierce/WBZ poll will be released tonight. It's likely to be very tight come Tuesday.

Posted by Michael McCord at 03:15 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

Coincidence?
Two days after the Iowa caucus in which younger voters turned out in record numbers in support of Barack Obama, I got this press release from the Clinton campaign this morning:

Clinton Reaches Out To Young New Hampshire Voters
Holds Roundtables With Young Undecided Voters In New Hampshire
Launches “Ask Hillary” Feature on Facebook In Conjunction With Tonight’s Debate

The Clinton Campaign continued its outreach to young voters Saturday, holding roundtables with undecided Granite Staters and launching an “Ask Hillary” feature on the campaign web site to allow voters to pose questions directly to Hillary.
“I want to hear from young voters about their concerns and encourage them to participate in this incredible process,” Clinton said. “I have been making change for 35 years, and with their help, I will go to work on Day One to make change in the White House.”
Hillary and Chelsea Clinton will hold a roundtable with four undecided voters ages 18 to 25 on the campaign bus traveling between Penacook and Durham today, fielding a range of questions on the most pressing issues facing young people in New Hampshire . Among the undecideds will be Ben Coleman of Bristol , who celebrates his 18th birthday today and plans to major in science and mathematics at the University of New Hampshire .
n Durham , Hillary will continue her outreach to young voters, holding an hour-long conversation with 30 young undecideds at the Bagelry.
Also Saturday, the campaign launched an “Ask Hillary” feature on its web site, reaching out directly to Hillary's Facebook supporters in conjunction with tonight’s ABC/Facebook debate in Manchester . Voters can submit questions to Hillary over the next two days, and she’ll post video answers to the top five questions on the site early next week. Questions can be submitted at hillaryclinton.com/ask.
Gore supporters drop bid
The Draft Gore New Hampshire folks have dropped their bid for an Al Gore write-in effort to raise the profile on alternative energy development in the presidential campaign. Farrill Seiler, the group's leader sent out the e-mail earlier today and said he contacted some 2,000 members to vote for the candidate who might best embrace the former vice president's policies. Though it was unlikely to be a repeat the Ralph Nadar in New Hampshire and Florida in the general election of 2000, with every vote up for grabs on Tuesday that will be one annoyance for the Democratic candidates.

(earlier)
Just got a report that the Obama event in Nashua will likely draw more than 2,000 this morning -- but then all the candidates are drawing huge crowds as the clock now works for some candidates and mostly against the rest of them.
I was surprised that Iowa proved to be such a chopping block for Dem candidates Joe Biden and Christopher Dodd who made such herculean efforts in Iowa. It's truly a cruel business. I saw Biden shaking hands (with family in tow) with voters just before a caucus began in Des Moines. His son Hunter talked to me enthusiastically about the crowds his father was drawing and was looking forward to tonight's debate in Manchester. Who knew that would be his last campaign stop before dropping out a few hours later. Dodd ran probably the least artifical television ads in Iowa at the end -- just him looking into the camera talking about his desire to lead the country and the experience he would bring. Dodd had made the total committmnet by moving his family to Iowa. And then by 9 p.m. central time it was over for him as well.
Can't help but admire the spinning and positive thinking taking place by those candidates not named Huckabee and Obama. Romney talks about the first inning of fifty inning game (a mangled sports analogy at best) and strangest of all, claiming a change platform himself (for Washington but not the presidency. Uh?) Silver medals at the primary level drive candidates to do odd things -- just ask Dem John Edwards who has claimed victory of sorts (over Hillary) and said it's a two-person race between him and Obama. That's audacity of hopeful thinking in action. And Hillary has come back to New Hampshire washing her hands of Iowa as not really historically significant (she's right of course) and a good effort by her campaign (right aas well). But we think she would have been singing a much different tune had she finished on top. I know my confidence would have been tested had I not been supported by seventy percent of Democratic caucus goers in Iowa (to show the weird nature of perception in these things, Obama, the convincing winner in Iowa, was not supported by around 62 percent of the same caucus goers)
The good news is that here in first-in-the-galaxy primary land, the media mob that has descended upon us won't have to spend time explaining an exotic caucus formula. It's one person, one vote and turnout here (which could smash all records) will be key -- the more the merrier is the Obama campaign song. We will see the full impact of a theorized Iowa slingshot effect -- or will it be a boomerang full of surprises for for the frontrunners.
More later on the debates I won't be attending but will be watching.

Posted by Michael McCord at 10:45 AM| Permalink | Comments (2)

I got out of Des Moines early (really early) and beat the main media skeedaddle from the Iowa's caucus kingdom to our fair first-in-the-solar system primary land for a final blitz of campaign saturation. Here are a few Iowa follow ups:
I heard from Joyce Chamberlain, the Democratic precinct chair in Pleasantville where caucus night was like elsewhere throughout the state -- a record-smashing event. Earlier in the week (read here) I had traveled to Pleasantville, a small rural town southeast of Des Moines, for a morning coffee talk with Chamberlain and some of her friends (known in the area as the "Coffee Ladies"). She believed that Pleasantville would have a record turn out (to perhaps 150) and she was right about that -- only off by more than 150. Here's her report:

"We had a big turnout. Too big for the space we had. Here are my numbers:
Total Attendees: 304
We elected 29 delegates which broke down to:
Clinton 8
Obama 9
Edwards 12
Richardson was nearly viable on first count but could not attract any more. Dodd only had 3 at first count. 5 uncommitted.
The big surprise I wasn't planning for was registering 114 new democrats. Its allowed to switch parties to participate. We had many Repubs at our caucus. They must have thought we Democrats are more fun."

And then there was Tim McLean, an undecided first-time caucus goer from nearby Pleasant Hill who reported back that he made a decision to back John Edwards (he also like Republican Ron Paul). His wife Lonita, also a first-timer, opted for Hillary Clinton. The big news there also was turnout which broke records, a fact McLean attributed to the number of good choices Democrats felt they had with their candidates (two of which, Biden and Dodd, have since dropped out -- the high of Obama's triumph was matched by the low of seeing presidential campaign hopes dashed even before making it to New Hampshire.)

Leave it to a sourpuss editorialist at the New York Times today, of all days, to moan and cry yet again about how unfair it is that Iowa and New Hampshire have such a major impact on the nominating process. Boo hoo. This editorial was an act of establishment self-indulgence. There were the usual complaints about how superficial the process is, how issues aren't being addressed and other such claptrap. The best idea offered is regional primaries which plays into the big money players and wouldn't have allowed, for example, Huckabee to emerge or McCain to survive. What penetrating imagination -- and it ignores the Times' own reporting and what I witnessed myself of a serious committment to caucus, a knowledge of the issues (often as astute as any so-called expert) and how this looney tune arrangement managed to draw in tens of thousands of new and younger voters, both for Obama and Huckabee. There are good arguments to be made for how truly irrational our nominating process is and goodness knows I see the absurdity of it -- but to offer nothing as a substitute for a something that does engage voters who might otherwise be ignored is the weakest form of advocacy. There was far too much to celebrate on numerous levels today than to consider seriously this anemic editorial.

In my first post-caucus daily link, we find a reason why John McCain hearts Mike Huckabee as the Huck-man victory in Iowa was a political kick in the groin for Mitt Romney -- which surely made McCain smile.

Posted by Michael McCord at 01:12 PM| Permalink | Comments (3)

DES MOINES, Iowa -- (11 p.m.) I've just returned from the Barack Obama victory speech in downtown Des Moines. The crowd was fired up. Obama had recovered most of his voice to deliver a powerful speech that had little to do with policy and everything to do with shooting to create the political majority he has talked about on the campaign trail.

The sense among the few media folks I talked to was one of being stunned by the depth and breadth of Obama's victory on the Democratic side. Three stunning exit poll results from Iowa for me was that Obama beat Hillary Clinton among women, drew major support from indepedendents and swamped everybody among voters under 30. It will be interesting to see if that trend repeats itself in New Hampshire.

A telling moment of my Iowa visit came earlier tonight at one of the precinct sites when I walked outside and started talking to Jane Elgin. She was older woman who said the Obama folks had dropped her off at the wrong precinct. (probably a rare gaffe for the organization that night). I did my civic duty and drove her to the right precinct and she shared her excitement of going to her first caucus and supporting Obama -- despite a strong respect for John Edwards. It was a rare, unvarnished snapshot into what happened at her precinct and across Iowa -- not because of who she supported but the simple fact she came out on a cold winter's night to make her voice be heard.

It's back to New Hampshire and five days of saturation campaigning beginning with Romney in the middle of the night for an airport raqlly in Manchester -- and Obama for an airport rally of his own in Portsmouth at 8:45 a.m.. I wish I had their airline connections. My flight to Minneapolis takes off at 5 a.m. Call me the zombie pundit.

(7 p.m.) The waiting is over.
I visited two Des Moines precincts as Democratic caucus goers began to file in -- in potentially big numbers if you use major traffic overflow as a measure. At one of them, Jackson Elementary School in a Des Moines neighborhood, Joe Biden and his clan were shaking hands and asking for votes. His son Hunter told me Biden had drawn large crowds at the four events across the state (on a plane) before setting down in Des Moines -- and they were already looking forward to New Hampshire and Saturday's night debate. (Hunter Biden also emphatically denied the rumor of Biden cutting a deal with Obama for his support if his supporters did not reach viability in their precinct. See below for more)

In a truly unscientific poll of my own, I talked to eight random voters not wearing campaign buttons or sweatshirts and each of them were first-time caucus goers -- and each of them were Obama supporters. Brian Bacus and Traci Kaufman came together and Bacus told me he "was energized by the whole thing (Obama's candidacy)" and "He's the first politician I can honestly trust." The couple had gone to three rallies during the campaign season (Bacus had also run into Obama at the downtown food court today) and Kaufman said that Obama "made me proud to be American." Jane Elgin, who was conflicted because she also liked John Edwards a lot, said she was coming out to caucus for the first time because Obama represented change and a chance to turn around the country.

(earlier)
This is what happens when the campaigning comes to a grinding halt and rumors start making the rounds. I was minding my business and leaving Java Joes, a downtown coffee shop, when a woman looked at my press credentials and asked me if Id heard that Bill Richardson was urging his supporters to make Barack Obama their second choice if he wasn't viable in their precinct (viable: that 15 percent threshold necessary to make the final cut). No, I said, I hadn't heard anything about such nefarious activity and found it hard to believe such a deal would be made because it's a lose-lose for everyone. -- and how could it 'enforced' anyway? (I bumped into David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager, at an event in Des Moines last night, and such backroom deals didn't come up in the conversation. He looked happy to have survived Iowa with his wits intact.)

I didn't think any more of ithe rumor until I checked my computer again and saw it must have really made the rounds -- and expanded to include Joe Biden -- because Walter Shapiro of Salon wrote a story about it. What do they say about idle minds?

(earlier)
Father George Kelly and son Mathew Kelly are undecided voters who have to make a decision soon -- Mathew in Iowa tonight and George in Concord Tuesday. Mathew, a college professor in Pella, is a first-time caucus goer and will attend the local Democrat caucus with wife Anne. Both are supporters of Bill Richardson though Mathew said he also was impressed with Dennis Kucinich. "I like the honest kind of talk out of them." He told me what matters most to him is the ability to speak the unflinching truth and likes Richardson's no-nonsense approach on the environment, the war in Iraq and education. He said that Richardson would make a major push on energy and global climate change in part because he believes it's a "panic" situation requiring a man to the moon effort. As for Iraq, he told me "the biggest slap in the face to anyone who lost someone on 9/11 is that Bin Laden is still alive" because of the diversion to Iraq. Mathew told me "I'd be very surprised if they (Richardson or Kucinich) won and if he must make a second choice he's leaning (like so many I've talked to) to John Edwards while Anne is leaning towards Hillary Clinton.
As for father George -- when I talked to him last week, he was undecided between Richardson and Edwards. Alas, George won't get a second choice in New Hampshire on Tuesday.

First-time caucus goer Tim McLean is an undecided independent who could go for Republican Ron Paul or Democrat
ohn Edwards. Needless to say that's an interesting voter mind set. McLean, a financial accountant from nearby Pleasant Hill, told me earlier today he probably wouldn't make up his mind until later this afternoon. Most of all, he told me, he's looking for somebody, anybody who will "break the ideological boundaries" and deal with his top two, very connected issues -- a rational and national health care system and stopping out of control government spending and the soaring national debt that goes with it. McLean believes if we don't get control of spending, pressing issues like health care reform and climate change will be victims of a financial drought.

(earlier)
It's all about win, place and show for the candidates and sorting through the media buzz of the past two days, one development is near the top -- Will John McCain make the Republican top three in Iowa after having essentially written it off? If he does, this will rival the winner's headlines going into New Hampshire.

Second speculation story line that sounds a lot like New Hampshire: Will the independents show up and break Democratic in heavy numbers. If they do, it will be an exciting night.

Weather forecast: cold, sunny, windy, in the 20s with wind chills in the single digits tonight. Downright balmy.

(earlier)
What the brigades of talking head pundits may be talking about while waiting today, courtesy of Talking Points Memo and the final Zogby/Rueters/C-CPAN tracking poll here in caucus kingdom.

Needless to say, these would be interesting outcomes if they prove accurate. Here are the raw numbers including up and down movement from Jan. 1:
:

Democrats:
Obama 31% (+3)
Edwards 27% (+1)
Clinton 24% (-4)
Richardson 7% (+0)
Biden 5% (+1)

Republicans:
Huckabee 31% (+3)
Romney 25% (+1)
Thompson 11% (-1)
McCain 10% (-2)
Paul 10% (+1)
Giuliani 6% (-1)

In my daily link, John Dickerson of Slate speculates that Hillary Clinton might have found her herself, her stride on the campaign trail.

Posted by Michael McCord at 11:02 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

At least I assume he's considering a nap after his well-publicized 36-hour marathon that ended a while ago in West Des Moines...I am still up, having just returned from an Obama event at the local Hoover High School (named, I found out, after Herbert Hoover who was dispatched in 1932 in the midst of the Great Depression by Democrat Franklin Roosevelt.) More than 1.000 (estimated) turned out on a cold night and I saw more than a few walking for three-four block walk in the cold: I was one of them) for an event that didn't start until around 10 p.m. I know they have a reputation for civic engagement (and super high literacy rates I read) but, with all due respect and affection, don't these Iowans have a life?

The wrong person to ask this question was Chris Coleman, a Des Moines city councilor who takes this business seriously and with enthusiasm. He kept his teenage children Maggie and Nick up late on a school night in a bi-partisan campaign tour blitz -- I think I got this right but he told me they visited Fred Thompson's office (Fred wasn't there), to the same rally I was at with Mitt Romney, to Joe Biden's office (Joe wasn't there), to the John Edwards rally and then to see Obama. The one stop he couldn't make ws the Bill and Hillary Clinton show, also in Des Moines. You know your are feeling inadequate as a professional scribe when Joe Citizen out hustles you on the campaign trail.

Coleman plans to caucus for Joe Biden but when I asked what does he hears from his friends and neighbors, he pointed towards Obama. "He's the buzz."

The man with the buzz was working with only one engine of a four-engine voice. It was mostly gone after five stops across the state today and months of campaign abuse. Even if he couldn't raise his hoarse voice very high, the crowd was juiced and the media swarm tagging along was a who's who of the Washington elite (a Tim Russert of the Meet the Press there, a Maureen Dowd of the New York Times and Andrea Mitchell of NBC over there, and a Jonathan Alter of Newsweek and Judy Woodruff of PBS as well) which only adds to the buzz.

It was a different kind of buzz at the Mitt Romney rally which was of a smaller size but pretty juiced up in its own right. Romney strives for the Ronald Reagan style of scripted political storytelling, heavy on the optimism (There's no distress in America that can't be solved without a little effort -- and a good scapegoat to take the blame) and even heavier on inspiring tales of flag, family, faith and values (some 57 varities of values -- Yankee, heartland, midwestern, southern values to name a few Romney mentioned). It's a lullaby routine that can be disarming and Romney looks like a winner -- which for the $20 plus million he's invested here, he'd better get a high return especially when compared to the bargain basement operation and self-inflicted wounds of late of his closest rival Mike Huckabee.

For my money, your best bet for a complete immersion into cognitive dissonance partake in a back to back Republican and Democratic candidate rallies. They might as well be talking about conditions on different planets in far apart solar systems.

Posted by Michael McCord at 12:36 AM| Permalink | Comments (1)

Talk about getting your point across. One of the most emphatic signs I've seen is a big billboard on NE 14th Street in Des Moines for Ron Paul. In big letters it reads "Will Shut Down the IRS." Don't know about the truth in advertising or constitutional issues, but it sure gets your attention. I haven't spent enough time here to see too many campaign signs for the Republican hopefuls but Paul has the most of those I've run across.

Posted by Michael McCord at 09:27 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

PLEASANTVILLE, Iowa -- I shared a long coffee hour talking politics and caucus with the "Coffee Ladies" of Pleasantville, a small rural town some 30 miles southeast of Des Moines off of Route 5. It was a very cold morning but the drive there was stunning: rolling white farmland glistened in the sun. The highest building in town is a silo at the Smith Fertilizer and Grain company but the coffee at the Smokey Row, a coffee and fountain shop, was good (the recommended bisquits and gravy breakfast was delicious) and the conversation was lively. A picture of Barack Obama sipping coffee in Smokey Row was hung by the cash register (he'd stopped by two weeks earlier) with a caption: "You never know who's going to stop by the Row."

I was there courtesy of Joyce Chamberlain, who has been the Democratic precinct chair in Pleasantville (population: maybe 2,000) since 1976 and the coffee group has been a regular part of the routine of some 25 ladies -- the men folk get their coffee elsewhere -- who talk of what people nomrally talk about on a daily basis. Needless to say, the talk of late has been the caucus and little else. Of the 11 I talked to today, 10 were planning to attend the local Democratic precinct caucus which could draw as many as 150 -- which Chamberlain told me would make it quite crowded at the local Memorial Building It's the largest of 17 caucuses in Marion County.(Republicans have their caucus across the county in Pella.) The coffee ladies were well known in the area and campaign staffers have stopped by regularly to make the cases for their candidates. While I was pleasantly grilled about what I thought and who I'd seen on the campaign trail in first-in-the-galaxy primary land, I managed to get an early caucus beakdown. In an very informal and impromptu straw poll, the support broke down like this: Edwards 3, Richardson 3, Obama 3, Clinton 1 and one undecided (between Hillary and Obama).

My favorite quote from the coffee ladies about the fluid nature of the caucus process came from Rose Warren: "I stand my ground 'til the last minute."

Read more about my visit to Pleasantville in tomorrow's Out on a Limb column at seacoastonline.com.

Beginning at 6 p.m. local time, it will be media traffic jam time as the Clinton, Obama and Edwards campaigns have purchased up to two minutes of local news time to make the final plea. It's an expensive plea for support but one that will gnerate more buzz for the buck than the typical homogenized ad. At the same time I've been invited to a Caucus Media Reception at the Des Moines Art Center -- it's this sort of appreciation for hard-working scribes (food and drink included) that makes Iowa unique.

In the shameless promotion department, New York Times blogger Michael Falcone picked up my "fish out of water" musings of a New Hampshire primary devotee covering the fuss in Iowa. Read his take here.

Latest caucus night weather forecast: Balmy in the 20s.

Posted by Michael McCord at 01:35 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

DES MOINES, Iowa -- No one is embracing this final full day of frenzied (and freezing) campaigning before tomorrow night's caucus more than John Edwards who is in the midst of an iron man trek across the state. Titled "36 ideas to strengthen the middle class," the plans are for 36 straight hours of campaigning until late tonight in West Des Moines with an appearance with singer John Mellencamp (that's when I plan to catch up with him: Edwards may not need sleep but I do). The Bill and Hillary Clinton tag team will also end up here in Des Moines tonight as will Barack Obama -- and then there's the rest of the Democratic gang. I need to be cloned, pronto.

I'm venturing out into the artic freeze and travel to Pleasantville (southeast of Des Moines) for coffee and voter chatter. I missed yesterday the second round of GOPer Mike Huckabee's eccentric non-negative political theatre, this time with actor (sort of) Chuck Norris delivering a negative slap to the face of Mitt Romney. Oddly, no questions were allowed though it was staged for reporters. The buzz this morning is that Huckabee is daring to depart the caucus kingdom for an appearance tonight with Jay Leno.

Speaking of theatre, there's actually a play running right now called "Caucus: The Musical." Why don't we do such things in New Hampshire?

By my reckoning, Hillary "every stage of her life has prepared her for the presidency" Clinton has cornered the market on back to back ads -- one voter centric and another Hillary centric. The combination is not unlike that of the Terminator -- she will be back again and again.

In between the ads (Chris Dodd earnestly told me again and again that he's an experienced leader; Ron Paul tells me he's delivered 4,000 babies; Joe Biden is ready to take on a nasty world), a Des Moines television station gave helpful hints to those of us departing on Friday morning (get to the airport really early and pack smart). They are thoughtful and nice here.

In my daily link, Jeff Greenfield in Slate gives a reasoned diss of the Iowa caucus system. It's all true and it doesn't matter a wit.

Posted by Michael McCord at 07:50 AM| Permalink | Comments (0)

For the fourth time today I've checked the weather for Des Moines, Iowa tomorrow through Friday (a balmy 10 to 15 degrees high awaits me), and I'm in an Iowa frame of mind as I prepare to leave behind first-in-the-galaxy primary land and head to first-in the-universe caucus territory. In my daily link, Christopher Hitches takes apart the Iowa caucuses and skewers the bizarre process that gives us not only Iowa but our own circus. In particular, Hitchens takes the mainstream media machine to task for enabling the insanity.

One of my favorite nuggets was from an Australian commentator who wrote this explanation for the folks down under and warned it was important to take notice of what will happen in Iowa (has to do with choosing the leader of the free world with looks positively strange to 99.5 percent of the rest of the world.)

“The Iowa caucuses are a process so bizarre and byzantine it is either, depending on your outlook, the essence of grass-roots democracy, a quaint anachronism, or perhaps just plain crazy. For a start, only a small fraction of Iowans will vote. In the Democrats’ case, it is not a secret ballot - people gather in groups in corners of a room to indicate their support for a candidate, and then try to convince those in the other corners to join them. They pick delegates to county conventions, which then lead to district and eventually state conventions. And long after the media has lost interest, these delegates can change their allegiances. If the United Nations sent observers to monitor the poll they would shake their heads," said Mark Coultan of the Sydney Morning Herald.

I get to add to the circus. One Iowan told me "the state is overrun with candidates, their handlers, campaigns and roadside gawkers." I'll start posting from Iowa tomorrow.

Posted by Michael McCord at 03:25 PM| Permalink | Comments (2)

The Mitt Romney brigade obviously does. It's bad enough for Mr. Conservative come lately to get passed by Mike Huckabee in Iowa but to have John McCain too close for comfort here in first-in-the-solar system primary land? That's a hard punch to take.
You could see this coming from miles away. Romney, the Concord Monitor's favorite Ken Doll candidate, has a less-than-sweet Happy New Year greeting for John McCain: please go away. To no surprise of anyone who has read the Karl Rove playbook of warfare campaigning, the Mittster has gone after McCain for being less than honorable and pure-bred conservative when it comes to taxes and immigration. His latest ad released today on the NH battleground of confusing ideas, gives faux praise by announcing that “John McCain, an honorable man. But is he the right Republican for the future?"
Not according to the Mittster.The ad continues: "McCain opposes repeal of the death tax. And voted against the Bush tax cuts — twice. McCain pushed to let every illegal immigrant stay here permanently. Even voted to allow illegals to collect Social Security.”
I'm surprised Mitt didn't add "lions and tigers and bears and mmigrants and taxes, oh my" when saying he was approving the hardly subtle message. In my daily link, The Politico offers a reminder that the Mittster's career path to born-again conservatism and the various stances he has taken in the past is a gift that keeps on gving for his opponents.

Before I head out for the holiday weekend and a trip to Iowa to see what all the fuss is about, here's my Friday shameless promotion plug for Sunday's Out in a LImb column. It's the First Annual Primies, a nod to some of my favorite moments and observations on the campaign trail during 2007.

Posted by Michael McCord at 01:29 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

If it's Thursday (or Wednesday or Friday or Saturday) it must be time for the latest Hillary Clinton campaign theme of the day (or hour). The most recent mouthful in Iowa is “Big Challenges, Real Solutions: Time To Pick A President" which was theme distinct from last week's "Working for Change, Working for You Tour" in New Hampshire (which included "Moms and Daughters Making History" events) and really distinct from a recent themed excursion in Iowa called "Every County Counts Tour" and even more distinct from the recent "Ready for Change, Ready to Lead" tour in Iowa and NH. I could name scores of others (and I do mean scores) that reflect the past year's efforts but I think you get the point -- when it comes to peppy themes, the Clinton campaign can't be beat.

It took long enough but the Clinton campaign finally did figure out an effective ad theme with the latest effort titled "Stakes." It's smart, succinct and thankfully not weighed down with thematic baggage. It's also the most effective ad of the campaign (and will hopefully allow people to forget last week's holiday ad theme debacle.See it here.

I doubt Dem hopeful Joe Biden has gone through too many themes during his valiant primary season quest to break through the celebrity and media horse race chatter dominated by the Clinton/Edwards/Obama grudge match. He's spent too much of the campaign like an eccentric uncle people enjoy but wouldn't necessarily trust with their vote. Well, Joe told Walter Shapriro of Salon there might be a Iowa caucus surprise out there for his campaign -- which would help his prospects immensely in New Hampshire. Read about Joe Biden's self-assessment here in my daily link.

Posted by Michael McCord at 10:17 AM| Permalink | Comments (0)

On this special Boxing Day, just 13 days away from the first-in-the-galaxy primary day of reckoning, I visited the Blue Hampshire bloggers site to check out the latest endorsement chatter and in particular, talk about the eye-opening sucker punch delivered by the Concord Monior on Mitt Romeny earlier this week. The anti-endorsement body slam on candidates was one used to see regularly (and with enjoyable hysteria value) by the Union Leader when William J. Loeb was running the show. But I guess we have entered a new era of anti-advocacy. You can read more here.

Earlier this year I met retired Army Gen. John Johns who talked to the Portsmouth Herald editorial board during a tour of retired generals critical of the Iraq war and how it was dangerously undermining our long-term military capabilities. I've talked and corresponded with Gen. Johns a few times since then and he has come out in support of Democratic hopeful and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and campaigned with him recently. Johns sent me this letter recently to make the foreign policy case for Richardson especially in regards to the aftermath of the Bush debacle in Iraq.

Dear Mike,
It was good talking to you on the teleconference a few weeks ago. I have fond memories of our meeting earlier this year with your editorial Board and have thought of how events have unfolded since then, especially the debate over the results of the “surge.” The purpose of this note is to update you on my thoughts on the Iraq situation and secondly, to comment on my recent appearance with Governor Bill Richardson in New Hampshire, in case you were aware of that
Personally, I believe it is premature to take comfort in the fact that violence has been reduced in Iraq. As I have said all along about General Petraeus and his team of advisors, they are first class and their COIN doctrine is on target. Nevertheless, I still believe it is far too little and too late to change the course of events that we have unleashed in Iraq.
There is little doubt that the increase in troops in Baghdad has provided increased security; however, a great deal of the reduction, it seems to me, is the result of factors other than the increase of troops. First and perhaps foremost, is the brutal sectarian cleansing that had divided Baghdad into enclaves that separates the warring religious parties. The half million or so Christians, of course, are largely gone out of country and the Sunnis and Shiites walled off from each other. While this has reduced the friction between the groups, I’m not sure it is advantageous for the goal of developing national unity.
The change in strategy in Anbar Province, where we are now working with tribal chiefs to arm and train their militias, preceded the surge and is rather independent of that action. While this provides a temporary benefit to us, and I am in favor of this change, it will make national unity more difficult. It may be that some are correct in saying that the partition of Iraq into semi-autonomous sections is a reality and we should junk the idea of a unified Iraq. Again, that may provide short-term benefits in reducing violence and U.S. casualties, but what does it do in promoting national unity. As I read it, we have decided to arm and train the Sunni militia to rid the insurgency of Al Qaeda elements and at least buy the cooperation of the Sunni tribal chiefs. As you can read in the daily news commentary, the Iraqi central government is not happy about that and sees the Sunni militia as future enemies.
I am not convinced that the partition idea is wise in the long run. Look at the situation in the north involving the Turks and Kurds. We trumpet the Kurdish region as a beacon of stability, etc. it seems to me that we have created a monster by whetting the appetite of Kurds in Turkey, Syria, and Iran to join with their Iraqi brethren in creating a greater Kurdistan. If we think we saw brutal repression of Iraqi Kurdish insurgents by Saddam, wait until the Turks, Iranians and Syrians deal with Kurdish insurgents who want to join that greater Kurdistan. Add to that dynamic our presence in the Kurdish area, trying to balance our relations with Turkey and the Kurds, and you have a recipe for chaos in the region.
I have just read in the 19 December 2007 Washington Post the latest Battle Update Assessment provided General Petraeus. The report clearly says all segments of the Iraqi people blame us for their problems and want us out. If you have not read that report, I recommend you do so. The post article is by Karen DeYoung.

Frankly, I don’t know how we can extricate ourselves from this quandary with anything resembling success. I haven’t changed my overall view that we need to get out of Iraq as soon as possible, and yet do it in a responsible way. I believe the Bush strategy is merely kicking the can down the road so as to hand the problem over to the next administration. That is the reason that I have been working with Governor Bill Richardson in refining his position and appeared with him in Iowa and briefly in New Hampshire at one event. As I told you and your staff, I am an Independent and offer my views to any candidate who wants to listen. I have offered to appear with Jo Ann Emerson, (R) Missouri and will do so with any candidate that lets me give my candid views without following “talking points’ provided by staff. I will not tailor my talk to fit a specific candidate. Bill Richardson has honored that position.
I appeared with Bill Richardson because his plan is the closest to offering a way out of any of the candidates. As I understand him, he pledges to have all U.S. forces out of Iraq within a year of his presidency. The notion that he is being irresponsible is nonsense.
The first point is that Richardson has stated his desire to remove all troops from Iraq, but not necessarily from the region. That would leave troops along the Kurdish/Turkey border if Turkey agreed and would have them available if needed in Iraq, but also would have their presence act as a deterrent in any Kurdish/Turkey problem. Other troops in say Kuwait would act as a strike force if necessary into Iraq. This of course would be done having a multi-national force in Iraq.
The second point about Richardson’s plan is that he would engage in vigorous diplomacy to get regional powers and the major powers involved in bringing stability to the region. This is described by some, especially the neocon hawks who got us in this quagmire and who insist on unilateralism, as being naïve. I would point out that Richardson’s plan closely follows the two major steps recommended by the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group; withdraw all combat forces and use diplomacy to internationalize the solution to the problem.
For those who say it is idealistic to think we can form an international coalition and create a multi-national peace-keeping force to fill the void as we remove our troops, I say we have no other choice. Every country in the world has a vital national interest in stabilizing the region and the notion that we can keep an occupation force there for the indefinite future is a path to greater disaster than we now face.
I agree with the Richardson approach in principle and that is why I have volunteered to be part of his military team. The only slight difference I have with him is that I would not rule out leaving some U.S. forces in Iraq to provide logistical support to a multi-national force if such a force cannot provide its own support. I believe he is flexible enough to make that adjustment if needed. It would be best if we could pull out all U.S. forces and the sooner the better.
I liked what Bill Clinton said about having him and G.H.W. Bush go on a trip throughout the world to convince the world that there is a new era of America working with the international community. I would include Brent Scowcroft, Chuck Hagel, Tony Zinni, and Colin Powell, as well as others who are respected for their belief in working through international institutions. I believe Bill Richardson should be involved in such an effort; I would certainly give him that portfolio if he is chosen as a running mate.
Again, I appreciate the courtesy that you accorded me earlier this year by affording me the opportunity to meet with your editorial Board. I wanted you to know that I still consider my efforts on foreign policy to be non-partisan and that my appearances with Governor Richardson offered me the opportunity to express my views candidly. I do find him refreshingly candid and adaptable to changing circumstances. He listens to diverse views from senior military advisors and has changed his mind when it makes sense.

Warm regards.
Brigadier John H. Johns, USA Ret.
22 December 2007

Posted by Michael McCord at 11:08 AM| Permalink | Comments (0)

In the regular shameless promotion spot for my Sunday Out on a Limb column, I'm writing about the last push for John Edwards who has campaigned hard on a consistent theme of economic populism and is calling on the country to rise up and take back the power. Is Edwards capturing a big undercurrent of economic anxiety? In the end do voters have enough empathy to care about the economic misfortune of others. I have a long distance talk with a big supporter and volunteer of Edwards who's spending some of his time helping out the campaign -- from Sudan.

Mitt's travails
On the good news side, Rep. Tom Tancredo gave up his presidential bid and endorsed Mitt Romney which gives the Mittster the zenophobic voting block. On the bad news side, both the Boston Globe and Boston Herald, papers who know Mitt the best (or at least think they do), endorsed John McCain. And then there is the issue of Mitt's memory and his video game use of history -- as in he remembers seeing his father George (former Michigan governor and 1968 presidential candidate) marching with Martin Luther King, Jr. in the 1960s. In my daily link, Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo deciphers the Mittster's tortured "see/saw" explanation about what really didn't happen was a metaphor for good intentions about his Civil Rights bonafides.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/061649.php

Posted by Michael McCord at 08:12 AM| Permalink | Comments (0)

While Dem Bill Richardson was bowling in Portsmouth last night -- and making it out in time to dodge the latest winter mini-storm -- voters discovered he wasn't very good with the candlepins but he is determined to raise an issue that's been a genie put back in a bottle -- Iraq. His campaign has released what might be called the first 'attack ad' of the Dem primary as Richardson has gone after the big three of Clinton, Edwards, and Obama for their Iraq policies. I say attack ad lightly because it's more of a gentle prod than a hammer but he does make the point because you can't simply eliminate Iraq from the political equation because of the relative calm perhaps before the next storm. The serious questions aren't growing smaller as I heard GOP anti-war critic Ron Paul say yesterday. You can see the ad here.

In my daily link, Richardson reminds folks that Iraq is more than an inconvenient truth lurking the closet -- it's the key to almost everything domestically and internationally. Whether voters are ready to believe that is another matter.

Posted by Michael McCord at 07:12 AM| Permalink | Comments (0)

It wasn't so long ago -- perhaps two or three dog years -- that GOPer John McCain was feeling annoyed because he wasn't being annoying enough (in the polls or in fund raising) for other candidates to notice him and attack him (most candidates lack in the self esteem department when they aren't being attacked). Nothing like a few endorsements (including one by my Portsmouth Herald), a political smooch from part-time Democrat Joe Lieberman and a serious bump in the polls to get noticed -- and attacked.
The Democratic National Committee hounds didn't waste much time and have been sending out non too flattering press releases. The DNC roasted McCain for missing a Senate vote on the alternative minimum tax why he was campaigning to eliminate it. Then today, the DNC sent this friendly historical reminder out:"In his new campaign ad today and out on the campaign trail, Arizona Senator John McCain likes to pretend he opposed Don Rumsfeld's strategy on Iraq from the beginning. Back in Washington, however, John McCain has consistently been one of President Bush's most loyal defenders--a fact made clear by his event today in Boston with Henry Kissinger and former CIA Director James Woolsey. In sharing a stage with Woolsey, McCain is joining one of the leading members of the Defense Policy Board that helped shape Rumsfeld's Iraq strategy."
And then a pro-Huckabee independent group ran a telephone push poll in our first-in-the-solar-system primary state dissing McCain while kissing Huckabee (the Huck man has disavowed the group but surely can't be all that worked up about their dirty work that benefits him). McCain is riding the good press express again and his opponents are taking notice. I can't wait until the Mittster takes notice because if he goes after McCain, it could get really nasty (John and 'Mr. Torture Know it All' Mitt aren't exactly on speaking terms.)
Anyway, must be nice for McCain to start feeling the love of being attacked again. In my daily link, Slate's John Dickinson nicely captures the latest reincarnation of John McCain.

Constitutional reprisals
During a stop in Portsmouth with the Herald editorial board, GOPer Ron Paul, who has become the financial rainmaker in this primary among the Republicans, brought up a unique solution to tracking down and eliminating terrorists like Osama bin Laden: he brought the constitutional reply of "Letters of Marque and Reprisal" to essentially deputize certain Americans to become mercenaries in service of the Congress and country. Well, that was a rare moment when you really do hear something so far out new that you almost fall out of the chair. I confess in almost three decades of political reporting I'd never heard that one before. Curious I looked it up and for those keeping Constitutional score at home that's Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 in your playbook. It's arcane like the Third Amendment (peacetime wuartering of soldiers in private homes) but strangely not that far out of the loop. Leave it to Ron Paul to give you a Constitutional lesson a day.

Scheduling, Edwards style
I ran into a disgruntled Edwards supporter who left an event in Portsmouth Wednesday, the one headlined by Bonnie Raitt and Jackson Browne, after waiting almost two hours for it to start. "I love the guy but I've seen him five ttimes this year and they are always an hour late. It's starting to piss me off."

Posted by Michael McCord at 06:37 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

Ken Burns, the award-winning New Hampshire documentary filmmaker ("The Civil War" and recently "The War" to name just a few) has endorsed Dem Barack Obama -- and spoke out despite a desire to remain mum about his choice because he's become "disappointed" with the tone of the overall campaign thrust of the past two weeks by a candidate and former First Lady by the name of Hillary Clinton. "I think she's getting bad advice," said Burns in a conference call with reporters. He spent most of his talking about he was attracted to Obama and his "positive, unironic" vision for the country. Burns said that Obama was the most "authentic" of candidates and one necessary to face the many challenges the country faces -- and one who can inspire the country to tap into "the better angels of our nature." In the synchronicity department, the Clinton folks held a conference call a few mintues earlier talking about an alleged "negative" mailer put out by the Obama campaign. The irony of the two events was unmistakable.

Dem Joe Biden has an opinion on everything -- even when you don't ask him for one. Well, never bashful Joe sent out a gem of a release today blasting an endorsement -- that of right wing legal grinch Robert Bork giving his seal of approval to GOPer Mitt Romney. It connected the historical dots, especially the personal ones between Biden and Bork who likely don't share Christmas cards -- after all Biden played no small part in derailing Bork's Supreme Court nomination in 1987. Here's the release in all its rhetorical glory:
“The hallmark of Robert Bork’s judicial philosophy has been his consistent refusal to acknowledge a constitutional right to privacy. That’s why I led the fight in 1987 to keep Judge Bork off the Supreme Court. In my view, his endorsement of Gov. Romney is not something to tout; it’s a damning portent of the judicial philosophy Romney would promote as President. The last thing we need after 8 years of the Bush Administration’s policies of eavesdropping on Americans, extra-legal renditions, and refusal to define waterboarding as torture, is another 8 years of recklessness with our constitutional rights. If Gov. Romney is serious about leading the United States, I urge him to repudiate Judge Bork’s narrow view of the Constitution and acknowledge our privacy rights as individuals.
“The truth is, our next president will have the responsibility of picking at least one, but probably two, Supreme Court justices. We cannot afford to cede an inch to the radical right when it comes to appointing justices who could put the Supreme Court on a more conservative trajectory for the next decade or more. Back in ‘87 when I led the fight to keep Robert Bork off the Supreme Court, I did so because he made it clear that he did not support the constitutional right to privacy recognized in Roe v. Wade and Griswold v. Connecticut, which have long served as the legal underpinnings of a woman’s right to reproductive choice.
“And let’s not forget that Robert Bork paved the way for Richard Nixon to fire Watergate Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox after he requested tapes of Oval Office conversations. We find ourselves in a similar situation today, having learned that an administration official in the CIA had destroyed videotapes of the CIA's use of severe interrogation techniques on detainees held in secret, extra-legal prisons. Now, the Department of Justice is actually standing in the way of a congressional investigation into this corruption. The continuing saga of cover-up and delay by this administration must be stopped.
“We don’t need another President who will further erode the balance of power so vital to our nation’s well-being. Judge Bork’s endorsement of Gov. Romney makes me wonder if he shares Bork’s view of excessive Presidential authority.”

Congrats to Dem Chris Dodd for stopping the FISA reauthorization bill with an eight-hour filibuster that stopped the legislation in its tracks. Nice to see a Dem with some procedural guts for once. Wouldn't it have been interesting if fellow Dem presidential candidates Clinton, Obama and Biden had stopped campaigning and joined Dodd on the floor instead of merely supporting him with words? In my daily link, blogger Scott Thill offers an ode of appreciation to Dodd for showing a spark of leadership.

Posted by Michael McCord at 03:40 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

First off, we in the newspaper business -- and especially those of us on editorial boards such as yours truly -- should thank Hillary Clinton for acknowledging the awesome power of an endorsement as she did repeatedly today when mentioning the Des Moines Register nod to her. Her enthusiasm for the endorsement -- the political equal to Sally Field getting an Oscar and claiming "You like me!" -- was shown in how she used it as a blanket answer to everything during her morning talk show blitz.
Such as:
Q: Sen. Clinton, what about that NIE?
A: Read the editorial about how much I'm ready to lead on day one.
Q: Sen. Clinton, are you afraid to "roll the dice" because your husband certainly is?
A: I'm tested, vetted and the editorial board has confidence in me.
Q: Is former President Clinton becoming a sly attack dog on your behalf?
A: It's all in the editorial. I inspire confidence because what I lack in inspiration I more than make up for with confidence that I'm ready to go.
Q: What about that general election strategy?
A: The editorial captures the essence of me.
Who know editorial boards or editorial writers could spread so much joy?
Thank goodness Hillary Clinton got that endorsement...otherwise she really would be in the dumps only left with a rebooted "change" (as in "change agent" and expert in change who bathes in change) message that would have all the sincerity, as I've mentioned before, of a chastened George W. Bush -- who woke up one morning and became a "Reformer with Results" after getting his butt smacked by John McCain in the New Hampshire primary in 2000 (McCain ran as a establishment-slaying reformer). It's quite amusing to watch Clintonites rally around the change banner and attempt to trademark the political definition of change: you know, there are the annoying demanders of change (Edwards) and the wussy hopers for change (Obama) and then there are the hard workers for change (you know who) who can tell the difference between the change phonies and the real experienced change deal.

Funny how when I asked Richard Holbrooke the former Ambassador to the United Nations who was in New Hampshire stumping for Hillary -- iearlier today f he thought Obama was a risky, "roll the dice" kind of candidate who might put U.S. foreign policy in peril if he was, gulp, elected. Holbrooke, ever the gracious diplomat, wouldn't go near that question with a ten-foot pole and instead told me the Dems had put togeher a very solid slate of candidates. Then he really stumbled from the party line when he talked about what it would take to restore some sense of credibility to the country international's image. When he started talking about experience, he said he didn't want to go there (the defining part of experience) because there were many types of experience. Not exactly what the two campaign minders accompanying Clinton wanted to hear but it was honest. Holbrooke talked about Clinton's considerable talents to be president -- especially her service on the Armed Services Committee which Holbrooke believes give a candidate commander in chief gravitas if they are smart enough to embrace it -- and that Clinton has an esteemed international reputation. He told me the foreign policy differences between the Dem candidates have been "overdramatizied" and are rather minute. He wondered sort of out load why they (the campaign) didn't talk more about the relevant stuff like her Armed sErvices Committee work or that she knows how to "fight the bureaucracy" to get things done.

Why indeed? Perhaps just perhaps, when you're no longer the inevitable queen at the top of the polls, it's better to talk change and "roll the dice" than about what you might actually be good at.

Speaking of Obama , in my daily link, there's an interesting perspective about his candidacy and what it means by Gary Younge of The Nation. It helps explain why clinton and Obama are talking two very different versions of change -- and experience has everything to do with it.

Posted by Michael McCord at 08:32 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

Who knows if this means anything but the latest results are in from a Seacoast NH region hotbed of political activism-- the annual member's holiday party at Wentworth-By-the-Sea Country Club. According to an informal straw poll last week among 300 members (63 percent Republican and 37 percent Democrat), Rudy Giuliani and Barack Obama won close victories over Mitt Romney and Hillary Clinton respectively.
Here are the top 3 results:
Republicans: Giuliani 34 percent, Romney 32 percent, and John McCain, 27 percent.
Democrats: Obama 44 percent, Clinton 40 percent and John Edwards, 14 percent.

This straw poll came before the onslaught of recent state polls that showed Romney with double-digit margin over McCain and Giuliani and Obama-Clinton in a virtual dead heat with Edwards behind by a double-digit margin with a little more than three weeks to go.

Billymouth
It was no surprise that Bill Shaheen fell on his sword for Clinton after his baffling open-mouth exercise slamming Obama for his self-confessed drug use as a young man and suggesting that the Republicans would slice and dice him in a general election (as if they needed an excuse or anything resembling facts to do it anyway). Shaheen is an old political pro who knows New Hampshire upside down and rightside up but his poor judgment (I hope it was poor and not a planned exercise in self-immolation) stemmed from a frustration that has dogged the Clinton campaign for months -- they didn't expect the Obama tornado and mostly they didn't know how to deal with it when it showed staying power beyond the celebrity circus at the beginning of the campaign. Bill Shaheen knows New hampshire and has a great sense of what's happening on the ground -- what he and the Clintonites have yet to figure out is that Obama and his campaign may have a better grasp of what's happening today than they do.

Oh yea, they had a debate in the Iowa yesterday. In case you missed it this afternoon battle, in my daily link here's a boring recap.

Posted by Michael McCord at 09:04 AM| Permalink | Comments (0)

I'm heading to Iowa folks for 72 hours of fun in caucus and corn field land beginning New Year's day...more on that below as I ask for your assistance but for now it's back to the serious business of a certain primary we've been keeping an eye on...
After a few days in the political insane asylum of Washington, D.C. and I return smack in the middle of it here. With 27 days to go the circus mania is starting to break out. Just in the past nine hours, two dependable polls (Rasmussen and CNN/WMUR) shows the Dem race in New Hampshire a statistical dead heat between Hillary Clinton (leading by 31 to 30 in the CNN/WMUR poll) and Barack Obama (who leads by a 31 to 28 margin in the Rasmussen)...the polls aren't so encouraging for John Edwards, Bill Richardson, Christopher Dodd, Joe Biden and Dennis Kucinich. For the GOPers, the CNN/WMUR poll shows Mitt Romney leading John McCain and Rudy Giuliani by a 32 to 19 margin -- Iowa surger Mike Huckabee's isn't surging so much here with a fourth place showing at 9 percent.

Holiday tour news
The Clinton folks will have her back in first-in-the-galaxy land for campaign stops this Saturday -- call it one-part holiday tour and other part to stop the poll bleeding. Not sure if she'll have time for Christmas shopping. Speaking of coincidences (or not) when it comes to volatile poll numbers as primary day approaches, here's how you know the race is getting tight: According to the Washington Post, Clinton's New Hampshire man about town and advisor Bill Shaheen talks about Obama's admitted drug use as a young man in the context of electability and how the GOPers will tar and feather him in a general election with this issue. Hmmm, I seem to remember a certain candidate named Clinton (Bill) who handled the so-called drug issue in a, well, highly creative manner (smoked but didn't inhale pot) and that didn't seem to hurt him in 1992 -- though it did hurt his credibility and helped lead to allegations of "Slick Willie" with the truth. Obama at least has been out front and honest and this hurts him how? Because the GOP will accuse him of covering up more? The GOP attack hounds are gonna make stuff up no matter what (see Boat, Swift 2004). Possibly the oddest part of the Post piece with Shaheen was a seeming back-handed appreciative nod to George Bush for being evasive about his good times as a "young and irresponsbile" cad. Not sure if the Clintonites want to go there on this issue but hey, it makes my job more interesting. Read more here. I will have an update response later from the Obama NH folks who aren't happy at all about this turn of the attack screw. (UPDATE) A statement from Obama campaign manager David Plouffe "in response to the Clinton campaign’s latest attack":
“Hillary Clinton said attacking other Democrats is the ‘fun part’ of this campaign, and now she’s moved from Barack Obama’s kindergarten years to his teenage years in an increasingly desperate effort to slow her slide in the polls. Senator Clinton’s campaign is recycling old news that Barack Obama has been candid about in a book he wrote years ago, and he’s talked about the lessons he’s learned from these mistakes with young people all across the country. He plans on winning this campaign by focusing on the issues that actually matter to the American people,” said Plouffe.

On the more benign front...
Bill Richardson has released a new ad titled "Guts" that includes an endorsement from former auto industry maven Lee Iococca. McCain may have Curt Schilling supporting him but Richardson is tapping old Red Sox glory and will have former Red Sox great Luis Tiant stumping for him on Saturday in Manchester. Obama has Oprah but John Edwards will have musicians Bonnie Raitt and Jackson Browne on the trail with him next Tuesday & Wednesday -- including a stop at town hall in Portsmouth.

On the Republican side, John McCain released a new ad here called "Courage" which parlays his recent Union Leader endorsement into evidence that he's (1) conservative, (2) really conservative and (3) really really a fiscally conservative who will keep the Bush tax cuts permanent (the same ones he railed against 6 years ago as fiscally irresponsible). But hey, we digress and spend too much paying attention to past statements. You can see the ad here.
McCain had former acting Massachusetts Gov. Jane Swift campaigning in the Seacoast region (talk about payback: Romney swept her aside like so much political road kill in the lead up to the 2002 GOP primary) in conjunction with the announcement of a NH Women for McCain group. In the interesting string of history department, Swift replaced Paul Celucci who left his post early to become an Ambassador to Canada (he now supports Giuliani and attacks Romney) while Celucci replaced Bill Weld who now supports Romney (who himself was a part-time Governor for the most part) and doesn't care much for his fellow New Yorker Giuliani. Really, you can't make this stuff up. And speaking of Rudy, he had surrogates Susan Molinari and Nancy Johnson (former Congressmwomen) also Seacoast out and about stumping for him.

More on Iowa
I'm heading to Iowa on Jan. 1 and will be there through caucus night of Jan. 3. I'm asking for help from readers: such as good places to eat and where the political conversation might be lively in the Des Moines area; what questions should I ask when I'm out there; and what would you like to know about the mystifying Iowa causcus process -- or for those three readers in Iowa, what do I need to know before landing near the finish line of your caucus contest. You can contact me at mmccord@seacoastonline.com with suggestions, questions or comments.

Posted by Michael McCord at 02:29 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

Sorry I won't be around to see the Obama/Oprah revue in Manchester Sunday but your humble blogger will be down in Washington, D.C. until Wednesday at a journalism conference focusing on -- there's no getting away from it -- the 2008 election.

In my usual Friday shameless promotion plug for myself, I enocurage fans and non-fans alike to read my Sunday Out on a Limb column in the print Seacoast Sunday or on seacoastonline.com. I consider a Tale of Two Candidates, in this case GOPers Sen. John McCain and former Mass. Gov. Mitt Romney who spent Thursday in very different places.

Regarding Romney and his famous speech in Texas, here are two contrasting views:
Peter S. Canellos of the Boston Globe called it a "political tour de force" in an analysis focusing on the leadership exerted by Romney and its 'presidential moment' greatness.
In my daily link, provocative blogger Chris Kelly offered a distinctly non-mainstream media perspective.

Where do I stand? Somewhere between farce and distinguished as Romney was impressive in an absurd context. I would have been more impressed had he told the holier than thou crowd that faith is a private matter and let them figure his out for themselves. He didn't and what resulted mostly was a lame recitation of the obvious and full of historical bull and religious cliches worthy of a Christmas card. I still don't understand why he felt the need to make the speech in the first place.

Posted by Michael McCord at 02:51 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

While Democrat Hillary Clinton was in New Hampshire talking about the economy and Republican John McCain was in Portsmouth at our Seacoast Media Group home for a forum on energy security and global climate change, Mitt Romney was in Texas trying to accomplish the impossible — convince religious conservatives he was a man of faith and their values and not part of a wacko religious cult while avoiding the real elephant in the room of whether Mormons are Christians or not.
According to the Associated Press: “Let me assure you that no authorities of my church, or of any other church for that matter, will ever exert influence on presidential decisions,” Romney said at the George Bush Presidential Library and Museum. “Their authority is theirs, within the province of church affairs, and it ends where the affairs of the nation begin.”
To what extent he managed to stop the bleeding his campaign perceives from Republican rival Mike Huckabee (who just happens to be an ordained Baptist minister) remains to be seen. In my daily link, Andrew O’Heir writes fluently about why Romney’s speech has little to do with that of John F. Kennedy’s separation of church and state speech in Houston in 1960. Namely, Romney was dealing the modern religious and political dynamics of the Republican party.
But the speeches do have one thing in common on a cultural level -- dealing with intolerance, ignorance and bigotry. Frankly, the ignorance of the American people about Mormonism and who the Mormons are is an unfair burden for Romney to have to bear. I speak somewhat personally because I grew up in Southern Nevada amidst a large Mormon population and heard plenty of tales about the exotic nature of Mormonism. There were, as they say, good and bad Mormons, friends and neighbors. They were in their own way no different from Pentecostals, Latin mass adoring Catholics or dour Lutherans. They were with all their flaws and eccentricities, quintessentially American — and for the many I met, their religion wasn’t their defining feature.
There are good reasons for Republicans to disown Romney — his policy evolutions, his amazing lack of sophistication in foreign affairs and the fact that he was essentially a part-time governor most of his tenure in Massachusetts. But for so-called ‘values voters’ establishment to treat Romney as a religious (and political) heretic is a level of hypocrisy that would no doubt make Jesus blush.

Posted by Michael McCord at 12:45 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

Not unlike the old Bee Gees song, the Hillary Clinton folks say the kindergarten reference to Barack Obama (he of outsized ambitions at a very young age or so we are told) was just a big joke that well, obviously fell flat. We know there's an ongoing entertainment industry writer's strike but geesh, you would think the campaign could find someone, anyone who could offer a suggestion or two about comedic timing, presentation and most importantly, material. Read the New York Times take on this here. My favorite part was the eye-opening reaction of Clinton pollster Mark Penn who blamed the media for being "spinned" by the Obama folks and for having the bad taste of missing the joke. With all due respect Mark, this story spun itself without any help and your routine came across as, well, spin. Nice try. But hey, I digress. The best comeback so far belongs to John Edwards who had his campaign audience really laughing Tuesday when he said he wanted to be a "cowboy and superman" as a kid.

Speaking of Edwards, he is launching his fifth TV ad of the primary prize fight. It has the nice, catchy title of "Rigged" and he doesn't pull any punches. "...And we can say as long as we get Democrats in, everything's gonna be ok. It's a lie. It is not the truth," the script reads. "Do you really believe if we replace a crowd of corporate Republicans with a crowd of corporate Democrats that anything meaningful's gonna change?" For those keeping score at home and for maximum punch-line impact you can substitute "corporate Democrats" with Hillary Clinton. See the ad here.

Saint Rudy of 9/11 has another ad out and in this one he claims to love Ronald Reagan and really really hate terrorists. As if we really really didn't know. Courtesy of Talking Points Memo, see Rudy Giuliani's latest adventure in high-stakes political advertising here For extra bonus points, read the comment section.

Want to find out more about why GOPer Mike Huckabee now finds himself in rarified polling and stature air? In my daily link, I found this piece at Townhall.com by Michael Medved for a distinctly conservative perspective of the turmoil in the GOP ranks -- as they are waiting for Godot in the form of stand-out -- or perhaps, stand-up -- candidate.

Posted by Michael McCord at 01:10 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

GOPer John McCain deserves my political honesty response of the month so far award. While interviewing him yesterday about his energy and climate change policies (McCain will take part in a forum Thursday sponsored by employer), I asked the only Republican candidate who takes the issue seriously how 'green' his campaign was. He didn't hesitate: "Not very," he said with a laugh while riding on a diesel bus. He's looking for a biodiesel fill up somewhere in New Hampshire, I presume.

Mr. Rogers' neighborhood ain't so kind
Either in kindergarten or the second grade I wrote an essay about why I wanted to be president which wasn't such an odd thing to do in my day -- or during most eras I imagine. Anyway, my ambitions didn't go very far (too much playground time and not enough political plotting) and look where I ended up. The Clinton folks seem to have gone a tad overboard on the Obama character front accusing Obama of having sinister ambitions at an early age because he once penned the same essay I did. In my daily link, you have read this to believe just how strange this is. It's only a matter of time before this gainswidespread blogger ridicule and becomes late-night comic fodder.

Oh Hillary, about that vote on Iran...
Hillary is getting no love today. Fellow Dem rival Chris Dodd launched this broadside on Clinton's September vote for the Kyl-Lieberman amendment -- you know the one designating a military organization a terrorist band -- in light of the latest National Intelligence Estimate report regarding Iran. And Iran is an issue on the mind of many voters I've encountered in person or by letter
"As was the case with Iraq, the latest NIE makes it clear that this President is offering another false bill of goods to Congress and the American people in an attempt to build the case for war with Iran. The only difference this time is that we didn't start a disastrous war before we found out that the intelligence didn't hold up," Dodd said. "Our experience should have shown us the danger in trusting this Administration as it marched to war. That is why I and many of my colleagues - at least many of those who bothered to vote - opposed the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment. Unfortunately, Senator Clinton instead chose to lend credence to
the Administration's position. It's easy to say 'fool me once, shame on George Bush,' but when she's been fooled twice, shame on her."

She said recently she enjoyed the heat of the kitchen and she was ready for the fun part of the primary's final push. It's a good thing because it's likely to become a big and hot laughfest from here on out.

Posted by Michael McCord at 08:24 AM| Permalink | Comments (0)

In my daily link, Timothy Noah of Slate has a good take on the recent slew of almost hysterical broadsides the Dem candidate firm of Clinton, Edwards and Obama are firing at each other over how to define "universal" health care coverage. It's a thoughtful distinction that is more than talking point material especially in a state like this one where health care is a top issue. Noah points out that while Clinton and Edwards propose mandates forcing all to buy health insurance supplied by the government or private insurance. Obama says such a mandate isn't worth the politcal hot air expended because enforcing it -- by forcing, for example, someone to buy private health insurance they may not want so the larger goal of universality is reached -- is downright impossible and politically toxic in a country (and a state) where choice does matter. It's a good argument worth having because it is a policy and philosophical difference about accomplishing the same goal. the Clintonites scream Obama is being rather slippery by saying his plan will cover everyone as his latest ad suggests -- I say they are both right. Obama happens to win the finer point because he's being more realistic in saying it will cover everyone who wants to be covered. Clinton is right because he fails her definition of universality. The voters will decide who has the better defintion and the route to make it happen.

SCHILLING TO STUMP FOR MCCAIN
Will Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling throw high heat or more finesses stuff when he stumps for Sen. John McCain in Manchester Wednesday?

ATTACKING HILLARY'S ATTACKS?
The Obamaites have launched a web site to keep tracks of all things Hillary when's she in attack Obama mode -- which we suspect will become more frequent over the next month or so. See the site here and read the campaign release below.

Post on the Obama campaign blog from campaign manager David Plouffe.
Hillary Attacks By David Plouffe - Dec 3rd, 2007 at 7:39 am EST
Saturday night, the Des Moines Register came out with a poll that shows Barack Obama has pulled ahead of the Democratic frontrunner and is now leading in Iowa.
The poll also showed that by a wide margin, Iowans believe that Senator Clinton is running the most negative campaign in this race.
Yesterd