First thoughts

Posted: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 9:22 AM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: First Thoughts

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Carly Zakin
***

Repeating History? Obama gets the front-page treatment from the major papers this morning. While the New York Times looks into his impressive fundraising machine, the Washington Post asks this question: Is Obama just this cycle’s version of Howard Dean? Indeed, the history of 2003-4 is one reason why Obama is having a hard time convincing the chattering class he won't overtake Clinton despite his fundraising success, his buzz, and his large crowds. Fool the press once, shame on Dean. But fool the press twice… Also, don’t miss the Times piece, which notes that the Obama camp included people who bought campaign merchandise -- including key chains -- in its donor total. "No other campaign is known to have listed paraphernalia sales as donations," the paper says.

*** The Tour Continues -- As Well As The Scrutiny: On the second day of his poverty tour, Edwards makes stops in Ohio and Pennsylvania, where he will unveil a proposal to diversify schools in the wake of the recent Supreme Court decision. This morning, his tour gets plenty of coverage -- and so do the peccadilloes that have hurt his image, including that now-famous $400 haircut. “Voters vote mainly on who the person is. He's trying to communicate a message about who he is, a person who does not forget where he comes from,” Democratic pollster Mark Mellman tells the Washington Post. “The haircut issue is significant in that context; it cuts against the story.” Also, now that the Politico has uncovered that Romney’s camp spent $300 on makeup, look for Edwards supporters to use this as a test to see if the MSM covers Romney as harshly as Edwards was.

*** Vitter Finally Speaks: In his brief press conference last night, Sen. David Vitter (R) was more defiant than apologetic. That kind of tone might have worked the day after his DC Madam connection first surfaced, but was it the right one after a week of silence? Also, by denying the reports of frequenting prostitutes in New Orleans, did Vitter invite the press -- the same press his wife criticized -- to follow up on those stories? Speaking of Wendy Vitter, is she DC’s newest star? There was real emotion in Mrs. Vitter's voice -- perhaps anger that she directed at the press, but one can't help but wonder if there was a little reserved for her husband.

*** A Planned Day: Another day, another event where the Democratic presidential hopefuls will be speaking to a Democratic-leaning interest group… Elizabeth Edwards (at 8:45 am ET), Obama (at 11:45 am), and Clinton (at 5:30 pm) address Planned Parenthood in DC. Before that, Clinton addresses the National Association of Counties in Virginia. And afterwards, Obama raises money in Cincinnati.

*** Run-Off: Today in Georgia, former state Sen. Jim Whitehead (R) and doctor Paul Broun (R) compete in a run-off to fill the late Rep. Charlie Norwood’s (R) congressional seat. Whitehead, who fell just short of the 50% he needed to avoid a run-off in the 10-candidate special election back in June, is the favorite. Polls open at 7:00 am and close at 7:00 pm ET.

*** On The Trail: Elsewhere, Giuliani meets with supporters in Florida, while his campaign holds a presser in DC on his Justice Advisory Committee; McCain speaks to Christians United for Israel in DC; Richardson is in New Hampshire; Tancredo campaigns in Iowa; and Ann Romney makes two stops in South Carolina.

Countdown to the Ames Straw Poll: 25 days
Countdown to MA-05 Special Election: 48 days
Countdown to LA GOV election: 95 days
Countdown to Election Day 2007: 112 days
Countdown to LA GOV run-off (if necessary): 123 days
Countdown to Iowa: 191 days
Countdown to Tsunami Tuesday: 202 days
Countdown to Election Day 2008: 476 days
Countdown to Inauguration Day 2009: 553 days

EMAIL THIS

Comments

That top paragraph is a good point. Obama does seem to be fighting the ghost of Howard Dean. He'll either work through that or not, but I agree the Dean effect might be keeping potential supporters on the sidelines for now. On the flip side, Obama can point fundraising levels way beyond Dean's.

Also, Dean was just running against the wind. There wasn't a strong anti-Kerry undercurrent. In 2004, Democrats were simply looking for someone who could take on Bush. This time, there is that anti-Clinton undercurrent within the party. That opens the door for probably one other candidate, so Obama's challenge is to consolidate that support. If Clinton goes into the primaries with two or more seemingly halfway viable opponents, her chances are much better.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 9:35 AM)

fundraising: this morning on Washington Journal a lady called and said she donated to Obama's campaign (the question was if you donated to a campaign this year and why). the lady said she purchased stuff from the campaign and that was one of the donations. See, you guys are shouting about this when all of us who have bought from the campaign know it's going as a donation. Afterall, it is let known and it is not the only campaign to do this. I am amazed by the press going goofy over something most supporters are aware of.
On an off topic: all this garbage about a Hillary and Obama ticket. Hillary is DLC and is probably going to pick Vilsack or Bayh or some other DLCer and someone who is not going to overshadow her. If she gets the nod.
obama has stated he is not running for second. Plus, he is not DLC. And too independent. They are oil and water. obama would probably pick someone like Mark Warner or Webb or someone who is not in the race.
I so wish this line of thinking would stop.

diane (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 9:38 AM)

Haircuts or Hookers. The main difference between the Dems and Repubs, this week. Our tax dollars at work.

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 9:47 AM)

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 9:35 AM)says "If Clinton goes into the primaries with two or more seemingly halfway viable opponents, her chances are much better. "

Paul - Not certain what you mean here. Do you mean that her chances are enhanced with viable opponents? Seems counterintuitive.

Unless Ron Paul under some miracle captures the R nomination, I will vote D. I really really really do not want Ms. Clinton to be that "D".

Help me understand what you mean.

Thanks

Independent, Texas (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 9:49 AM)

David and Wendy Vitter both need to realize that when you claim "Family Values" as a political issue, you cannot get caught dippin' yer wick in someone else's candlewax.
If Dave Vitter is angry with anybody, it ought to be himself. The G.O.P. made the personal lives of politicians public domain with their attacks on the Clinton Family a decade ago. If you're going to throw it out, ya' gotta' be ready to take some back in return.
Vitter should resign to spare his family, and himself any further embarrassment.

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 10:00 AM)

Hey First Read guys - re "Countdown to the Ames Straw Poll: 25 days"

I admit that I haven't kept up with this but it seems as if there was some reporting in the recent past that almost none of the candidates are participating in this straw poll. Do I remember correctly? If so, did something change? Do you know how many candidates are participating?

Independent, Texas (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 10:12 AM)

GoNzO -GaTe it will not just fade away. 5,000,000 missing e-mails.

just me (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 10:16 AM)

Good assessment of the Obama-Clinton campaigns by Paul Miller. On the Vitter case, one more of the moralists falls under. I wonder if he kept his family jewels intact. After all, his wife was critical of Hillary pardoning her hubby and suggested that if it were to happen to her, Vitter would have to search the alleys for his jewels. Oh, the irony of things.

Ravine Force, Kissimmee, FL (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 10:17 AM)

Democrats need to win the south - and John Edwards is the answer.

Lisa, Douglas, GA (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 10:22 AM)

well, let us get into the haircut vs beauty care issue. For starters, Edwards had two haircuts vs one so called "beauty" session. Edwards had to repay the $800 for the things, I think Mitt should repay the $300 if it was charged to his campaign. What I saw in the story though, was it was used once, even though he was billed for 2 sessions. The difference between Mitt Romney and John Edwards is that John Edwards has been portrayed (fairly or unfairly, that is for the voters to decide) as a ambulance chasing lawyer. Plus the fact that the story with Edwards was how the $400 haircuts grew into $1200 haircuts (Washington post). Mitt had one session, how many haircuts did John have? And flying a guy from Beverly Hills is not a good thing when you are trying to take on an issue such as poverty, arriving at a town hall meeting looking like a million bucks when everyone else is shopping at Wal-Mart. Edwards will probably still get attacked on the haircuts, Mitt will probably get attacked on the $300 beauty stuff. We will find out who can stand the heat in the kitchen the most.

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 10:41 AM)

i'm just curious if its possible to cover an Edwards story without mentioning the haircut. Honestly, look back. I read this everyday, and everytime you write about him, you have to put in the haircut, sometimes (in parentheses) and sometimes not. Its ridiculous!

Josh Donat, Boston, MA (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 10:45 AM)

Maybe a better question is, " How effective will vitter be representing the people of LA"? Seem's to me that a solution could'nt be worked out within the political party's ( to have him stepdown) of LA, so vitter becomes defiant( along with his wife)& decides to go back to DC.Hypocrisy at it's finest. Let's see how much traction this $300 makeup job get's in the press ( I doubt much)." DELUSIONAL THINKING BY COMMON SENSE AMERICAN'S IS OVER"

rick,ky (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 10:51 AM)

Still - no mention from First Read about Hillary's $3000 in campaign funds for 2 hairdos. (WaPo)
Or that Rupert Murdoch and News Corp execs are sponsoring fundraisers for Hillary.
Tick...tick...tick...

Richard, Palatka, FL (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 10:51 AM)

I don't know, Jerry. For a guy, a single "beauty session" is worse than any number of haircuts at any price.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 11:03 AM)

GOPers seem to dominate the perversion news. Hypocrisy is character of religious extremist. Why do right-wing nuts predominate in these groups?

Flat-earther, Georgia (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 11:08 AM)

so all the wealthy candidate's spend lot's of money on they're appearance, is everyone shocked? probably a few people not happy that they can no longer keep the focus on edwards concerning this issue, I suspect we will hear less and less about personal hygiene costs now that the corporate candidates are involved, turn out the lights the parties over

MK,MO (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 11:11 AM)

"Is Obama just this cycle’s version of Howard Dean?...Fool the press once, shame on Dean. But fool the press twice..."

What the heck does this even mean?

How is Obama trying to "fool" the press? He's no more hyped than other candidates. Is it he's not being hyped by people the press app, but not hype from the right people inside the beltway?

I don't see how they can justify the Dean/Obama comparison at all, unless it is by a definition imposed BY THE PRESS not the candidate himself.

I do think Obama is like Dean in that his popular image - or at least the part which the press created - now annoys reporters who are now determined to make the story be about his downfall, even if it means artificially imposing it. There's a "he's not so great, let's take him down." tone which has NOTHING to do with journalism. Plus Obama's support base includes people (young, online, overly sincere) who the press disdains, because they like traditional power. So now the press is now straining to "debunk" as fraudulent, even though the most specious hype was generated by the press itself.

This is why the Beltway press has such little respect - because this isn't journalism. It's just a bunch of self-impressed sort presenting their impulsive feelings about power as researched truths.

The Mitt Romney story is a major test for the press - but not just for Edwards supporters. It's every media consumer annoyed by press obsessive use of a haircut as a to call Edwards girly or gay. At least Ann Coulter was honest about her homophobia.

This coverage is purile and manipulative and I'm tired of you posing as people who are merely observing discourse, when you're the ones actively participating in imposing these ideas upon it.

Jen Trenchant, Chicago, IL (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 11:14 AM)

Hmmm - this post is missing so I'll submit it again.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 9:35 AM) says:

"If Clinton goes into the primaries with two or more seemingly halfway viable opponents, her chances are much better."

Do you mean that if there is more than 1 viable opponent, that the split will favor Ms. Clinton? I'm not certain if that is what you meant or not. If so, are you recommending that Obama be her sole "real" opponent? I'm trying to decide how to vote in the primaries and this is an important issue for me.

I really, really, really do NOT want Ms. Clinton to be the D nominee. If Ron Paul by some miracle becomes the R nominee, he will have my vote. Otherwise, I'll vote D. I'd hate it if Clinton was the one to get my vote.

Independent, Texas (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 11:15 AM)

Paul, must have been a heck of a session LOL. Both sides of the aisle have to begin to realize that people don't want a rock star, they want someone who can talk about the issues. And (to my utter dismay) the only one who seems to get to the meat of the issues is Mike Gravel! Strange but true. I can imagine myself out there, I'd tell people the truth and probably need secret service protection up till I either quit or got whipped LOL.

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 11:18 AM)

Dean was not seen as a winner. Especially in Iowa, they seem to try to pick a winner for the general election, and Dean wasn't the guy. Clinton, with all of her negatives, can't seem to get out of the 30% range, and Edward's star looks like it's falling since he just can't get past the haircut problem. Question is, will they see Obama as a winner, or will they stick with Clinton. Obama clearly has some name recognition problems to overcome. When it gets down to two candidates, on which side of the table will the chips fall. On the GOP side, all of the Religious Conservative leaders (Lamb, Perkins), brushed aside his lobbing for pro-choice groups, so I think he's the chosen one. The longer he stays out of the frying pan, the better for him. He could drag out his coming out party until late fall.

Al, KS (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 11:28 AM)

If I were one of the dem presidential candidates that has the access to cash I would beg ron paul to be my running mate, this cat's got a lot of people who think he is pretty sharp

MK,MO (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 11:32 AM)

Independent - yep, that's what I meant. I think there's a top limit to Clinton's support, with a sizeable number of party members who don't want her to be the nominee. If those people consolidate on one candidate, they can beat her, I think. If they split between a bunch of candidates, she'll walk through.

In a way, the hot mic thing was bad for her in two respects. One is she got caught seemingly trying to be manipulative, which plays into one of her bad perceptions. The other is that she should be hoping for a large field of candidates going into Iowa and New Hampshire. At least that's the way I see it.

And based on what I've seen so far, I'd like Obama to be the one to consolidate support.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 11:33 AM)

Obama is not Howard Dean. He's Obama. As far as the complaints about mentioning John Edwards hair, I would urge Edwards supporters not to stop attacking the Media on this. I think they are being VERY kind to only mention Edwards hair. If they really wanted to hurt Edwards, like you claim they do, they would talk about the Make Up purchases at the Pink Sapphire. The Hedge Funds, The Poverty Center that was used as a front for his 2008 Campaign , his conversions of convenience regarding the war in Iraq and a variety of other issues that he was a hawk on, as well as many other things Edwards has done that gives the American people the perception that he is a fake. So, consider the Media only talking about the $400.00 Haircuts, a gift of Mercy.

BlueDiamond (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 11:33 AM)

Could we just move away from the haircut garbage? I mean, who the hell really cares?! Certainly not those of any real importance, it seems.

M. Boley (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 11:38 AM)

J. Merle Stanley your post 7/17 10:am said it best,
why let Vitter off the hook.
The gop never forgets anything, they rant family values shtick! The drip, drip, drip is constant.
They hate Bill Clinton and drag him into all manner of discussion.
Vitter fatigue, I think not!

H P Boston (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 11:53 AM)

H P Boston (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 12:00 PM)

John Edwards is wealthy because he was / is a high powered attorney who jealously, and zealously represented his clients just as he should have. If he were a republican they'd call him a capitolist.
But, because he's a Democrat they pick on him.
.....and somebody has to tell me where it's written that wealthy people arent allowed to spend money on themselves or show empathy towards the less fortunate.
I mean, what are we saying here; that super rich people suck, and if they express a desire to uplift the lower classes they should forfeit their wealth?
Come on, let's get real. Isn't trying to help the poor better than saying "we're going to feed your kids ketchup for lunch, and call it a vegetable" like Reagan's GOP did during the 1980's?

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 12:04 PM)

If Mrs Clinton isn't the nominee, I prefer either Senator Biden or Dodd, 2 strong foreign affairs leaders

Tom, Delmont PA (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 12:14 PM)

I guess First Thought thinks personal hygiene is a much bigger issue than the positions of each candidate. Goes to show how far our country and electorate have fallen. Please get back to issues.

Mark Y; Westlake Village, CA (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 12:26 PM)

Paul/Gravel? Gravel/Paul? These guys seem to be the only one holding anyone's feet to the fire, albeit because they have a snowball's chance in Hades, but nevertheless...

Doug, San Diego CA (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 12:30 PM)

Again MSN leave out any mention of Ron Paul. He's gaining supporters accross the country and no one wants to even mention him. Freedom of speech and the press or censorship?

Laura, Rochester, NY (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 12:32 PM)

Todd, I'll help you guys out since you din't get the note or havn't had a chance to post it yet. from the Obama spokesman:

Campaigns that don't expect to have this level of interest among small donors tend to outsource their campaign material sales to vendors. For example, the Clinton campaign has contracted with Financial Innovations to sell their paraphernalia. Financial Innovations makes all of the profit from those sales and takes the loss if no one buys the materials.

To our knowledge, the Obama Campaign, because of the tremendous grassroots enthusiasm, is the only campaign to feel they could generate sufficient interest in T-shirts and other materials to not contract with an outside vendor.

Lyn Silver Spring, MD (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 12:35 PM)

So HP, you'll remember Vitter forever? And the Republicans remember Monica forever? And we never got off this cycle of one side calling the other more perverted?

No thanks. I'm hoping for something better. Not terribly optimistic I'll get it, but there's always hope.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 12:41 PM)

Chuck and Mark:

I saw this item over at The Politico (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0707/4982.html). It goes into how Mitt Romney spent $300 dollars on spa, hair and makeup services. I was just wondering, are you were planning on covering the GOP's personal groomuing habits as closely as you do John Edward's? I think we've clrealy set the standard that these types of expenditures are news worthy and I'd be interested on your take on how this will affect Romney's chances in race for the nomination.

Or is it only a story when the media thinks that it hurts a Democratic candidate?

John Doe, The Peanut Gallery (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 12:48 PM)

John Doe, The Peanut Gallery / the astounding lack of interest in romney's make up artist costs will prove to be laughable, edwards obviously scares someone out there, all the press should really be proud of they're un-biased coverage on this issue, but then we all know who signs they're checks don't we

MK,MO (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 1:06 PM)

John Doe -- Thanks for the comment. We mentioned that Politico piece in First Thoughts and Oh-eight (R) today.

And Lyn, we were putting up that Obama statement just as we got your comment. Cheers. Are you on their press list, too?

As always, we appreciate the feedback.

Mark Murray (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 1:11 PM)

I would love to get on the high road with you Paul,(not because Pauline is my middle name) but I see not only the hypocrisy of the GOP but it's weakness.
I will not be optimistic or hopeful until people like jerry, Dave and the rest crawl back in their holes.
I go with fight fire with fire.

H P Boston (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 1:20 PM)

I love when the self-rightous family values repugnants get what they deserve; short of jailtime for soliciting for prostitution; ongoing humiliation; what goes around comes around; bad karma; and throw unless you live in glass house.....however, the holier than thou Repugnants will continue to campaign on "moral values". It comes down to us voters to nip it in the bud and say "I will not vote for anyone who states they live a moral/christian and family values life . Have voters in this country become so shallow and gullible?

juan,ft lauderdale,fl (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 1:22 PM)

H P Boston: Do you fly the hammer and sickle?

Cats Call (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 1:30 PM)

H P Boston, I feel the same way as you. Bush, Cheney, and the GOP make my blood boil. I can't even stand to look at or even listen to this lying dictator.

Blue state baby (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 1:35 PM)

Mark:

All due respect, sir, but when the Edwards story broke you front paged it and have been harping on it at every opportunity ever since. So far, nearly the exact same situation on the Republican side has been buried in the Republican Nominee section of the blog and, I suspect, will not be mentioned ever again. Maybe I'm wrong about the story being a 24 hour event, but I don't think my assumption is unreasonable.

I should be clear here, I think that both of these stories are nonsubstantive. But I can't help but notice that when a Democratic front runner does something that makes them look elitist, effete, or in any way less than "Rambo in a suit" it gets full coverage. When a GOP front runner does the same thing, it doesn't get covered to nearly the same extent, if at all. This is a systemic problem and I am not pointing my finger only at First Read. You guys have the dubious honor of being the only section of the MSM that I have even a remote chance of gettting a response from. If I had any reason to believe that Couric, Williams, Blitzer, et al would actually read anything I sent them, believe me, I would.

John Doe, The Peanut Gallery (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 1:39 PM)

Consider that the 5 main canidates (Dem & Rep) you argue about everyday may all be in the "none of the above" catagory 6 months from now.
Indecided still leads the polls.
The main problem I see right now is that there no adults reporting on the forthcoming election. Just childish gossip mongers. Plus some outright shills primarily from the right wingnuts with few left wingnuts for entertainment value.
This election is about getting an actual thoughtful adult in the White House with a forward looking policy agenda. Looks, haircuts, makeup, clothes, empty sound bites don't mean a damn thing except to the fringe loons.

OutWest, Canyon Country (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 1:55 PM)

Cats Call : Do you fly the swastika?

Justcurious, Northern Lights (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 1:56 PM)

Cats I sure do! Why? because some dictator in the SICK white house shitted all over the red, white, and blue!

H P Boston (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 1:57 PM)

I think the conventions for both parties could be real barn burners. If no democrat gets enough delegates in the primaries to win the nomination, then it will decided at the convention, where anything can happen. And since the republican convention follows immediately after the democratic, it too could turn into a reactionary episode depending on who the democrats select.

JIm, Santa Cruz (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 2:06 PM)

"this just in" romney reportedly was recorded asking the cat who smears make-up on his face for $300 if he knew a good mechanic that was capable of mounting his dog carrier atop air force one, just in case things go his way

News Hound, D.C. (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 2:18 PM)

H P; time for your 2:00 pill. Let's try to cut down on the swearing in here.

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 2:23 PM)

"Cats Call : Do you fly the swastika?"

Nope. You?

Cats Call (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 2:24 PM)

Justcurious, Northern Lights / I tried to fly a swastika once, but I guess the wind wasn’t blowing hard enough

rudy gulliani (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 2:24 PM)

>> H P Boston: Do you fly the hammer and sickle?

> Cats I sure do!

A dead head flying a dead countries flag. Don't that beat all?

These Colors Don't Run, Tyler TX (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 2:27 PM)

Next >>

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=273256