Post-NH "reconfigured" Clinton campaign strategy of race-baiting: Clinton AIDES per Edsall @ HUFFPO

[cloudythescribbler]

Here's the article on Post-NH strategy, citing Clinton's AIDES in seeing white voters attracted to HRC by race issues. This is truly scandalous, and jibes unfortunately with not just the Andrew Cuomo remark, but with Hillary Clinton's own remark, dubbed "peculiar" in the excruciatingly tactful New York Times about Dr King and LBJ.

Here's the money quote and the URL:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/11/as-new-hampshire-dust-set_n_81159.html

Quote:

Aides believe that, combined with a surge of support among women, Clinton's 'crying' incident, and the possible role of race in bringing white voters to the New York senator's side, they see the makings of a reconfigured strategy to carry the campaign forward.

[wyldwolf]

1. "jives??" You said "jives!!"

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. Most Honest Posters Just Cite The Article's Title Verbatim

Then I read the whole article and there is no mention of a race baiting campaign..

Why are some of the supporters of the candidate who promises to unite us some of the most divisive posters on this board and why do they intenionally mislead?

[cloudythescribbler]

8. The quote itself CLEARLY refers to what is fairly described as "race-baiting" ...

And the title of the article, FWIW, is:

"As New Hampshire Dust Settles, New Clinton, Obama Strategies Emerge"

Now what difference does THAT make?

The protestation, assuming that the post is not "honest" is too clever by half

[Essene]

2. isnt that quote from the "comments" not the article?

[cloudythescribbler]

14. No, the quote comes from the article -- check the URL

somehow a lot of people have trouble seeing that this is BOTH A DIRECT QUOTE FROM THE ARTICLE (whether the article itself is responsible journalism itself is another issue some might question) AND IT MEANS WHAT I SAID IT MEANS (it is a fair description of race-baiting)

Uncomfortable truths are precisely the one's people like to call "divisive"

[Essene]

19. Ahh, double-checked. I stand corrected. Scary

o.0 but yet fits the evidence.

[cali]

3. You mean

jibes, not jives. Unfortuanate mistake when discussing this particular issue.

[Cameron27]

11. Yes, unfortunate mistakes occur

when anyone, discusses this topic.

[cloudythescribbler]

15. OK, I've corrected it -- and YES that WAS a mistake from my part ... nt

[bigdarryl]

4. the sad thing is Dick tuck toe Morris predicted they would do this BEFORE

the NH primary. he said after she lost NH the Clinton's would start using CODE words DAMN!!! was he right. I guess when you used to be there campaign adviser you know them better than anyone else.

[MollieBradford]

10. if dick morris said it

it must be true, since we all know how in tune he is with the Clintons. :eyes:

[cloudythescribbler]

16. It would be REAL helpful if you or someone else found and posted the URL for this LOL nt

[jonnyblitz]

23. yeah, Dick Morris is a highly respected source here at DU

:rofl:

[Muddy Waters Guitar]

56. Dick Morass has already made such a fool of himself

that no matter of bashing we could do here could humiliate him further. He's a loser who gets paid ridiculous sums of money for his misinformed opinions. The route to renown as a pundit in the USA.

[cloudythescribbler]

57. In this instance, it appears that DM (who is a jerk) made a prediction which came true .... nt

[cloudythescribbler]

55. Highly thought of at DU or not, here's the URL (thx to Darryl):

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/01/07/video-dick-morris-says-hillary-will-use-race-to-beat-obama

There is a case, from the Dr King/LBJ comment (the one the Gray Lady called "peculiar") from Hillary Clinton herself, to remarks by various key figures supporting HRC (Andrew Cuomo, Kerrey, etc) to the report which is the focus of THIS thread (of the campaign strategy as reportedly seen by Clinton "aides") etc.

I begin to think that some people perfectly approve of HRC race-baiting but just use a lot of trollery to throw dust up in the air and protect themselves.........

BUT THE ISSUES REMAIN

[OKNancy]

6. Oh good grief.. talk about cherry-picking

I suggest DUers read the article before commenting.
Also.... no aid was named. Any unnamed source is suspect IMO.

[cloudythescribbler]

18. What CHERRY-PICKING? -- yes, it cited UNNAMED aides, but that doesn't make it false

The statement clearly suggests that the author was relating the impression HE or someone working for him got from, yes "UNNAMED" Clinton aides. And that impression CLEARLY was that the "reconfigured" post-NH STRATEGY of the Clinton campaign included the issue of race drawing whites to support Hillary Clinton.


Again, some people just don't like to address uncomfortable facts. It is a FACT that this reporter on HUFFPO reported what I said. Yes, it's possible the reporter was wrong, or stretched his case, but there is PLENTY of corroborating evidence, isn't there?

And this article just links what we can infer with actual reportage of the thinking of HRC's campaign staff -- it's REALLY that simple.

As with the divergence of exit polls from reported results, nothing is more offensive and "divisive" in the eyes of many than plain, RAW truth.

It's for that RAW truth that I like DU at all, even though it like anywhere else, cannot be consistently relied upon.........

[Maribelle]

22. You might want to reread that and focusing on reading comprehension.

The reconfigured strategy is to replace what happend in NH

The title is clear: As New Hampshire Dust Settles, New Clinton, Obama Strategies Emerge

as in:

New Clington stgrategies

[Marrah_G]

27. I heard from an un-named source that cloudythescribbler is posting famebait n/t

[cloudythescribbler]

33. Personally, I don't like the unevenly applied "flamebait" policy. For example ...

the moderators were able to dismiss all the arguments about the divergence of the exit polls in NH with the reported results as without merit, and characterize the posts on that topic as "flame bait". They also characterized it as "divisive".

I think that people have to be mature enough to look at extremely uncomfortable facts and deal with them fairly. There are several legitimate possible complaints (eg that the aides cited are unnamed, which they are), and much criticism that is simply tendentious because the material is "hot"

[Marrah_G]

36. An un-named source said it and therefore it MUST be true....right?

[creeksneakers2]

54. I can't tell

if the author is reporting information he gathered or if he's speculating.

[ellacott]

7. If this is ture it's very troubling n/t

[fightindonkey]

9. Comes From HuffPo: Will Lie For Barack At Any Cost, Even If It Means Losing

[Maribelle]

12. The article says no such thing. Your race mongering is truly pathetic.

desperation?

[Essene]

13. Actually... the Clinton's are the ones race baiting. But yea, this article didnt say that

I'd post the EVIDENCE of the clinton campaign's race baiting, but then the admins would delete this message for "spamming" lol

[Maribelle]

17. The Clinton's are not race baiting.

Race baiting is the act of using racially derisive language, actions or other forms of communication, to anger, intimidate or incite a person or groups of people, or to make those persons behave in ways that are inimical to their personal or group interests. This can also be accomplished by implying that there is an underlying race based motive in the actions of others towards the group baited, where none in fact exists. The term race in this context can be construed very broadly to include the social constructs which define race or racial difference, as well as ethnic, religious, gender and economic differences. Thus the use of any language or actions for the purpose of exploiting actual or perceived weaknesses in persons who can be identified as members of certain groups, or to reinforce a group's perceived victimhood, in order to do them some sort of harm, or to manipulate their behavior, can be contained within the concept of "race baiting." Many people who practice race baiting often believe in racism, or have an interest in making the group believe that racism is what motivates the actions of others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_baiting

[Essene]

20. At the risk of having another one of my posts deleted... WRONG.

They are most certainly race baiting in every imaginable way. It's really amazing and scary, because never in a million years would i have imagined the Clintons doing this stuff.

But it's not an accident and it continues unabated.

(and yes, every time ive posted this set of facts/record, my post has been deleted here on DU with them calling it "spam." sigh)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SMEAR FACT CHECK: Hillary's attacks on Obama

### He's likely to get assassinated.

Yes, somebody who introduced Hillary Clinton emphasized the comparison with JFK and how he got killed. “Some people compare one of the other candidates to John F. Kennedy. But he was assassinated." The Clinton admin distanced themselves from his comments, calling them inappropriate, but the damage was done. http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/07/civilrights/

### He's no MLK. And dreams need a President not speeches.

She dissed MLK first of all, suggesting REAL change only happened because of President Johnson not MLK's dream. She then implied that he doesn't remotely compare to MLK or Kennedy. "“You know, today Senator Obama used President John F. Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. to criticize me. He basically compared himself to our greatest heroes because they gave great speeches." Think about what she's actually saying. Sad. http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/07/civilrights/

Think about it...

“Dr. King’s dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act.” “It took a president to get it done.”

“You know, today Senator Obama used President John F. Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. to criticize me. He basically compared himself to our greatest heroes because they gave great speeches. President Kennedy was in Congress for 14 years. He was a war hero. He was a man of great accomplishments and readiness to be president. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. led a movement. He was gassed. He was beaten. He was jailed. And he gave a speech that was one of the most beautifully, profoundly important speeches ever written in America, the “I have a dream” speech. And then he worked with President Johnson to get the civil rights laws passed, because the dream couldn’t be realized until finally it was legally permissible for people of all colors and backgrounds and races and ethnicities to be accepted as citizens."

Somebody remind Hillary that she supported Barry Goldwater back then... o.0

### Al qaeda will strike!!

"Look what happened in Great Britain," she said. "Tony Blair leaves, Gordon Brown comes in, the very next day, there are terrorist attacks... So you've got to be prepared on Day One with everything ready to go." Sorry, but that's a disgraceful comment, directly suggesting terrorist will strike with the election of Obama. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0801/05/cnr.06.html

### Flip flopper (abortion swiftboating)

Just watch the ABC debate from 1/5/08. She repeated this charge in various ways, although in fairness she did get into specifics in a few cases (which i think is fair game if you challenge the record itself on the issues). However, for a couple months... this has been her primary charge against him. http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=4092530

However, when they intentionally distorted his record on abortion to effectively swiftboat him in NH, that's really the kind of politics the democrats cannot afford in the primary. http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080106/NEWS01/801060396/1043

### The hip black male who can't provide

In the words of that Clinton adviser: "If you have a social need, you're with Hillary. If you want Obama to be your imaginary hip black friend and you're young and you have no social needs, then he's cool." http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2238148,00.html

### False hope.

"An untested man who offers false hope." "We don't need to be raising the false hopes of our country about what can be delivered." Clinton herself said this. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/Story?id=4088317&page=1 & http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_01/012851.php

### Obama just shucks and jives

Andrew Cuomo, NY Attorney General, and Clinton fan... came out swingin at Obama after NH primary. “You can’t shuck and jive at a press conference,” he added. “All those moves you can make with the press don’t work when you’re in someone’s living room.” http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0108/Dept_of_word_choice.html

### Hispanics won't vote for him

Clinton pollster Sergio Bendixen: “The Hispanic voter—and I want to say this very carefully—has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates.” http://thepage.time.com/2008/01/12/racial-tensions-a-potential-boost-for-clinton

### Obama is just poetry.

She's been stumping with comments about how he's just talking poetry and she's ready to govern with prose. Cute. " a doer, not a talker." http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080107/ap_on_el_pr/democrats_rdp

### Obama is just a fairy tale.

Bill Clinton's rant the other day that i think shocked more than a few of us. Clinton flat out called Obama a liar, said he was a fairy tale. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLDx4NZr2u4

### Obama is in this only because of blind media.

Bill Clinton also suggested it was "wrong" that Obama has been able to get through 15 debates without being called a liar by the press. He implies the blind, uncritical media is the problem. "The press never reported on" yadda yadda. "Give me a break!" He thought Hillary was going to lose NH and was basically blaming the media for this "fairy tale." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLDx4NZr2u4

### Obama lacks depth and reality.

"On a lot of these issues it is hard to know where he stands, and people need to ask that." "As famously was said years ago, 'Where's the beef?'" Clinton said that herself. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=4088317&page=1

### Muslim (danger danger!).

Several Clinton campaign folks were removed over this. One may argue this absolves her from responsibility, yet anybody paying attention realizes this smear is arguably one of higher impact ones. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/12/10/second-clinton-volunteer-_n_76047.html

But this is only wacky emails having nothing to do with Hillary's camp! Not like Bob Kerrey and others kept this issue alive in the public dialog or anything. http://themoderatevoice.com/religion/islam/muslims/16573/clinton-support-bob-kerry-continues-to-raise-obama-muslim-issues/

### Drug record makes him unelectable.

Top Clinton advisor steps down after making various arguments about how Obama can't get elected due to his drug use. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2004077664_obama17.html

### Male chuavanism and the gender card.

Folks may reasonably disagree on the interpretation, but she's clearly playing the gender card lately - even implied that her gender alone equates to meaningful change in the White House (just imagine the outcry if Obama said that about being black). She said that in the 1/5/08 debate. Similarly, the spin out of NH is that his comment was rude and poor Hillary's being beaten up on by the boys *tear*. That's how i intepret this spin, and it seems very clear to me. And if you question her crying about her campaign hardships, she implies THAT is male chuavanism too. http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=4092530 & http://bourbonroom.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/01/07/clintons-candid-assessment/

And additionally... i'd like to just focus on this clip from the NH Debate. She was attacked on the issue of likability. She joked that he's likable. He DEFENDED HER in return. She even says "i appreciate that," yet all the Clinton spin doctors (and Rove) are trying to pretend he attacked her. Watch for yourself and be honest. These 2 were just handling an obnoxious question with grace, but now the Clinton base is trying to turn this into a chuavanistic attack by him? Get real. Watch it. It was friendly. http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ac7RuzYvtCw

Lying about a black man's "tone" towards a white woman is easy to get away with in 2008, I guess.

### Obama is Bush 3.0

"He’s very likable . I agree with that…. You know, in 2000 we, unfortunately, ended up with a president who people said they wanted to have a beer with." “I think it’s good to have a likeable president. But if I remember right, many people said they wanted to have a beer with George W. Bush. Maybe they should’ve left it at that – have a beer, don’t vote him in as our president.” It's a slick way to deflect the likability argument, but she even tries to imply this has policy implications, electing an inexperienced guy just because he's likable.

### Obama is too liberal.

"Hillary's aides point to Obama's extremely progressive record as a community organizer, state senator and candidate for Congress, his alliances with 'left-wing' intellectuals in Chicago's Hyde Park community, and his liberal voting record on criminal defendants' rights as subjects for examination." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/04/new-hampshire-will-be-key_n_79873.html

### Obama is too conservative.

They claimed he was "unwilling to take a stand on choice." His controversial gay marriage position is a legitimate issue, for sure, but they've tried to paint him as too conservative. http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2008/01/hillary_mailer_hits_obama_on_abortion.php

### Obama is soft on crime.

"Mandatory minimums take too much discretion away from judges." "Barack Obama's kind of change is where you sit down and you cut a deal with the corporate world." http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=4088317&page=1 & http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/04/hillary-hits-obama-for-op_n_79918.html

[cloudythescribbler]

30. I think this post is FINE, although (as argued elsewhere) I did NOT MISREAD THE ARTICLE

The quote proferred, read clearly and simply, means EXACTLY what I said it meant in the heading. Again, I haven't heard ANYONE ELSE come up with a plausible interpretation of this simple three line quote.

Note how many people ALSO claim that somehow Hillary Clinton was misquoted or taken out of context (even the NY TIMES wasn't so gentlemanly) or the stuff about Andrew Cuomo. The ability to look at something purple and call it green is a highly developed intellectual skill, as in this kind of society, MOST intellectual effort goes into OBSCURING the fact truth, and bending interpretations to the prevailing winds of power & agenda (which of course, means, in some quarters, the PROMOTION, eg, of 9/11 Horse manure and calling it "Truth") etc.....

[Maribelle]

34. You have misread it.

Surely you wouldn't have said the things you did regarding race baiting as part of the Clinton strategy if you hadn't misread it. Nothing could be further from the truth.

[Essene]

37. I stand corrected. I misread the article and it DID say that

I did a search of the page for it and it took me to the comments, not the article.

I went back and more carefully read it and see this indeed was in the article. Sad.

[Maribelle]

39. Not to worry, we all misread sometimes.

But that list you posted about two above needs your attention. A lot of stuff in there is inocrrect.


hasta luego

[cloudythescribbler]

21. The article didn't CALL it "race-baiting" but the QUOTE SUPPLIED describes it to a "t".....

When a truth is uncomfortable, many people like to become incredibly obtuse. If you simply read, closely, the segment that was quoted, about the "reconfigured strategy" -- note they refer to a STRATEGY, involving white voters supporting Hillary Clinton on that basis.

You might not believe the reporter, as some don't, and complain that the aides are unnamed, which they indeed aren't, but MY reportage of what was said was spot on factually accurate and fair.

Fairness is (as with some of the comments here)more often than not confused/conflated with what is acceptable in the social power context to say. <yes, this is MY reading of the situation, for those who want to get snarky about THAT>

But that isn't the same as fact truth.

[Maribelle]

25. I truly believe you've misread the article

sincerely

honestly

I think you've misread it

What is being reported is that because of what happened in NH, because of the tears, because of the possible race issues, both Hillary and Obama are creating different strategies to replace what happened in NH>

[cloudythescribbler]

38. No, the quote suggests that in appealing to women, and to whites ...

with the latter appeal being PRECISELY as the quote suggests, without USING the term race-baiting, there is a STRATEGY (which was successful) for moving the campaign forward.

The suggestion was that these appeals, which presumably helped Hillary Clinton, are part of the campaign's strategy going forward in time.

Now, this IS admittedly an uncomfortable issue. But responding to it is hardly "race-mongering". The issues are out there already and hotly debated. If you can't debate this sort of thing on open message boards at DU, where (relevant to the Democratic primary campaign) CAN THIS TOPIC BE BROACHED?

[Maribelle]

40. You are totally misunderstanding the article.

I recommend you seek help from an unbiased source



Amen.

[cloudythescribbler]

24. No, the very QUOTE I SUPPLIED said EXACTLY what I reported. You may feel ...

that the reporter wasn't accurate, or criticize the fact, as some have, that they are from Huffpo, or that they cite unnamed "aides",
or you may feel that even if it is all true, it's "race-mongering" to point it out......

But that doesn't change the reality. It's amazing what gets accepted (eg a push poll that presumes the whole issue of the Clinton campaign race-baiting is 'swiftboating' and then asks people whether they think this 'swiftboating' will succeed or not.

It is all well and good to be concerned about fairness and accuracy, but one should be just as careful in condemnation as they expect someone to be in reporting WHAT SOMEONE ELSE SAID, WHETHER THEY USED THE SAME WORDS OR NOT (anything in "" should be a verbatim quote, while other paraphrasing needs to be TRUE TO THE ORIGINAL MEANING, which my heading and post content were).

[Maribelle]

32. As I said above, I truly believe you've misread the article.

In the following paragraphs the aids are talking about Clinton's economic ploicy as the integrel part of her reconfigured stratgegy clealy satating they are convinced it played to her stgrengths in the Granite State. It is mentioned in the paragraph that three other factors were also involved, and but does not include those factors in the approach emphasizing the virtures of her experience and economics.

Clinton's economic policy announcement is a direct outgrowth of the January 8 New Hampshire primary. Clinton's strategists are convinced that the recent rise in unemployment and the manufacturing slowdown, which voters have been paying growing attention to over the winter, played to her strengths in the Granite State. Aides believe that, combined with a surge of support among women, Clinton's 'crying' incident, and the possible role of race in bringing white voters to the New York senator's side, they see the makings of a reconfigured strategy to carry the campaign forward.

This approach would emphasize the virtues of her experience and the economic success of Bill Clinton's two administrations, to undermine Obama's more abstract message of hope and unity.

[Marrah_G]

26. More divisive BS-

[Cameron27]

29. They think they're helping Obama.

[Marrah_G]

31. I don't think they think that at all

I think DU is being infested with people who are trying to cause infighting over race to distract and divide us all.

I don't think any of them care about Hillary, Obama or Edwards- except to make sure none of them win.

[cloudythescribbler]

41. ... and this from someone complaining of "flamebait"?

As I have said before in other contexts, the people who whine the most about "divisive" and "flamebait" are more often than not the MOST accusatory, the MOST given to ad hominem attacks, the most likely, as here, to try to insinuate that those with whom they disagree are scheming evildoers, etc.

The evidence of race-baiting in the Hillary Clinton campaign, including one statement by her discussed in other comments in this overall thread-web (?), is quite substantial and very much a real issue. A reporter from Huffpo, responsibly or not, speaks of (yes, unnamed) aides to the Clinton campaign corroborating these observations, including by the leader of the black Caucus in the House (who is capable of being wrong etc, I know). OK, so far, we just have facts.

Unpleasant and divisive? I say those who don't want to deal with such matters with equanimity should just get over themselves. I know there are many, as tolerance of meanness is most uneven in the near-vertical playing field of our system.

As to whether this is helping or hurting Obama, I think the truth is that its impact (here on DU), cumulatively, from ALL the so-called Obamatons, in microscopic. But it may raise some interesting points that people can take with them in actual organizing.

I know these comments aren't written with the polish of a George Orwell essay, but I do believe they can be comprehended by people reading it in good faith.

[Cameron27]

42. I know, but

for some reason this is how they want to play it. It's so ugly, that I've started increasing my donations to Clinton's campaign directly because of this behavior. I wish the Edwards' and Kucininch supporters would do the same for their guys too, and make it known, maybe that will stop it, and if not, it'll help their candidates anyway.

[Sparkly]

28. Who are these aides, and who are they aiding? nt

[Bluebear]

35. Oops, wrong url? The article it leads to says nothing like that

[cloudythescribbler]

43. If you just carefully and objectively READ THE QUOTE PROFERRED

It says EXACTLY that, although the 'appeal' to 'white voters' as a 'strategy' isn't described using the WORDS "RACE BAITING".

It is unambiguously and very fairly inferred from that quote.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

45. It Is Sad And Revealing

It shows a certain candidate's supporters for what they really are...

[Bread and Circus]

46. It's write in the text of the article. word for word what the OP posted in the

body of his post. It's a few paragraphs down.

It's not the body of the article but its there.

[Marrah_G]

47. I don't think they really are Obama supporters

[cloudythescribbler]

48. I'd really like to see someone who supports HRC really grapple honestly with the substance ...

Merely crying "BS" doesn't mean a thing. The quote says what it says, and the aides ARE indeed unnamed and some wouldn't consider Huffpo a good source (though no one has narrowed this attack to a detailed description of the SPECIFIC columnist (Edsall)), while others see raising the whole issue, no less for being true, as "divisive".

Of course, it's so much EASIER just to reiterate that you think something false -- the temptation to take this road is always there.

[Marrah_G]

53. I support all our candidates- I am a Democrat- I am backing Edwards in the Primary

Your posts are creating more animosity in what is already a volatile situation. You quote un named sources to paint a good Democrat as a racist. I do not object because it is against Hillary- I object because it is divisive and nasty and targeted at members of my party. I feel the same way about Obama being labeled homophobic. The only reason I can see for that is that you really don't care about our party or getting the pules out in November.

If you form a circular firing squad all the enemy needs to do to win is keep handing you the bullets.

[cloudythescribbler]

49. First you presumptively impugn the character of the poster, then ...

when a number of people attest to the FACT accuracy of the quote at issue and the reading of it, the attack is expanded to 'a certain candidate's supporters'.

If you are concerned about the revelation of character from what people post, maybe you could check out a mirror.....

[DemocratSinceBirth]

50. It's One Sentence Buried In A Seven Hundred Word Piece

The strategic goal behind Hillary Clinton's announcement today of an aggressive $70 billion economic stimulus package is to shift the debate onto favorable turf with proposals to improve economic conditions for the increasing number of financially strapped voters -- and away from the Iraq war and Clinton's 2002 vote in favor of the war, a vote which has fueled Obama's candidacy.

Obama has not yet countered Clinton's January 11 economic offensive, but today and yesterday he won a series of endorsements from top Democratic officials -- Senators John Kerry, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, and Arizona governor Janet Napolitano. These endorsements send a worrisome signal to the Clinton campaign that politicians in these areas judge her as more polarizing than Obama -- more likely to energize the Republican base -- and fear that she could damage the chances of local Democrats on the ballot next November.

Clinton's economic policy announcement is a direct outgrowth of the January 8 New Hampshire primary. Clinton's strategists are convinced that the recent rise in unemployment and the manufacturing slowdown, which voters have been paying growing attention to over the winter, played to her strengths in the Granite State. Aides believe that, combined with a surge of support among women, Clinton's 'crying' incident, and the possible role of race in bringing white voters to the New York senator's side, they see the makings of a reconfigured strategy to carry the campaign forward.

This approach would emphasize the virtues of her experience and the economic success of Bill Clinton's two administrations, to undermine Obama's more abstract message of hope and unity.

Today, Clinton proposed the following economic measures: housing assistance, especially to those threatened by foreclosure; energy assistance to poor and moderate income households; and extended unemployment insurance. This investment in "growing" the economy could, if deemed necessary, be quickly followed by a $40 billion tax rebate for low-income workers which would include cash payments in the form of a refundable tax credit to those whose income is so low that they do not pay taxes.

While Clinton is moving quickly to stake out her economic positions, Obama is touting his three new major endorsements.

There is no real certainty among political observers about the motivations behind Kerry's decision, whose announcement received the most publicity. Speculation ranged from the view that Kerry has made an impartial assessment of the strengths of Clinton and Obama, to more skeptical analyses arguing that Kerry remains deeply ambitious and is backing the candidate he sees as least likely to win in November, thus increasing his own chances to run in 2012.

Johnson, however, has no presidential ambitions, and has been scarred by seeing his fellow South Dakota Democratic Senator, Tom Daschle, go down to defeat in 2004. His endorsement of Obama, in this view, is based on a judgment that in his state, Clinton -- with her persistently high negatives -- would be more damaging to down-ballot Democrats than Obama.

Johnson reinforced this interpretation in his endorsement announcement:

"I'm supporting Senator Barack Obama in his race for the presidency because he is in a unique position to reach across party lines and unite our country," Johnson said. "As a red state Senator fighting for common ground, I look forward to working with a President who is more concerned with good ideas than partisan bickering, and I believe Senator Obama is that person."

Like Kerry, Napolitano could have mixed motives. Democrats are making substantial gains in Arizona and she, like Johnson, says she has concluded that Obama would do better down-ballot than Clinton in her state, which is steadily turning from red to pink, if not to purple. "I think he's a new young voice who has new appeal, particularly for those of us in the West," she told the Washington Post.

At the same time, Napolitano, a popular mountain-state politician, could be among those considered for a vice presidential slot by Obama, especially since the mountain states are a key Democratic target this year. It is virtually certain that Clinton would not pick a female running mate. Conversely, that is not out of the question for Obama, and Napolitano would likely be those on a list of possible running mates.

[cloudythescribbler]

51. Yay!!!! Finally, acknowledgement (even if dismissive) ...

And yes, it is but one quote in a 700 word essay that did NOT go into much more depth on that issue. However, unless we see EDSALL as irresponsibly reporting (which is possible), we must then address ourselves NOT ONLY to the public statements by Kerrey, Andrew Cuomo, HILLARY HERSELF (the one I cited as characterized by the ultratactful NY TIMES as "peculiar"), and other points, BUT ALSO to the report that aides see this as part of the campaign's "reconfigured" strategy.

You might not regard the point as important, or you might dispute the reliability of the journalist, or you might see it as divisive to discuss even if true

but I DON'T think the characterization as "dishonest" was at all fair, nor much of the other commentary here .......

[Sparkle]

44. Rove's plan is working.

Suckers!

[origin1286]

52. Sounds familiar

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4038976