ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC News Political Reporter



First thoughts

Posted: Thursday, September 06, 2007 9:24 AM by Mark Murray
Filed Under:

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, and Domenico Montanaro
*** Bill (Lacy) and Fred’s Excellent Adventure: More than 90 days have passed since Fred Thompson established his "testing the waters" committee. And in those three months, nothing seemed to go right for the budding campaign. Critics panned Thompson’s speeches; key staffers departed; the newspapers uncovered that he once lobbied for a pro-choice group (and the campaign flopped on the initial response to those stories); wife Jeri became a household name (and not necessarily in a good way); and everyone wondered out loud: “When is he going to in?” Well, he answered that last night on Leno, when he officially declared his candidacy. And his official announcement tour -- which begins today in Iowa and also includes a new campaign video -- allows him to start over and earn some positive press. It’s his time to shine, and if there was ever an opening for someone to virtually come out of nowhere and win the GOP nod, this is it. But those rough three months have left him with little margin for error here on out.

*** Last night’s winners: There were three clear winners last night: Giuliani, Huckabee, and Thompson. Yes, Thompson -- he came out a winner within the first five minutes, thanks to the moderator’s opening question about the candidate-to-be’s decision to go on Leno instead of showing up for this debate. The fact that every candidate (including Giuliani, Romney, Huckabee, and even McCain) took potshots reinforced the idea that the entire GOP field views him as a major candidate. In fact, most of the debate leads this morning included the Thompson shots. The Thompson folks could not have asked for a better setup. As for the winners who actually participated, Giuliani’s performance was particularly strong -- perhaps his best debate to date. He’s clearly comfortable being the front-runner; he absorbs the attacks from opponents without looking as if that opponent matters. His strongest answers were in defense of NOT signing the no-tax pledge and on guns, but his roughest moment was his shaky answer to the family-values questioner. Meanwhile, Huckabee doing well at a debate is about as common as the sun rising in the east. In particular, the exchange with Ron Paul where Huckabee got to defend McCain, defend the surge, and also call Iraq a mistake was, we dare say, a mix of Reagan and Clinton.

*** The Loser? From our perspective, it was Romney. He certainly didn’t have any friends among the debate questioners and the diner patrons, and that kept him on the defensive all night. Romney’s got to figure out how to turn all these attacks into a positive; Wednesday night was not a great night for the candidate who’s ahead (per the polls) in the early states. As for the rest, McCain won Luntz’s focus group and was praised in several post-debate analyses. But to us, his performance was not dominating, though his lecturing of Romney about the surge was a TV scene-stealer. At times, he was funny and loose; at other times, he was overly serious and a bit tight. Brownback seems less and less relevant (why did he stay in after his poor Ames Straw poll showing?); Tancredo seemed almost a non-factor; Hunter is very good at playing the Patriot card (but what part of the party does he represent that the front-runners don’t?); Paul was as angry as he’s been -- at one point, we wondered why he just didn’t scream, “Hey kids, GET OFF MY LAWN!”

*** Snake I’s? Today, Biden finds himself in Iraq, just days after he declared that he needs to finish second or third in Iowa. In fact, it's all about the "I"s with Biden: Iraq and Iowa. No one seems to come across more credibly on Iraq than Biden does, but he can't seem to get traction. Perhaps it's that he doesn't seem “new,” or that what folks do know of him isn't presidential. He's certainly done nothing to hurt his chances of becoming a key cog in a future Dem administration, but he can't seem to gain traction among the Democratic elite: from trial lawyers to labor (two constituencies that would have been with him under other circumstances). All in all, Biden is a candidate who is performing well at the big events (i.e. debates, key TV interviews), but isn't breaking through in the early states. No wonder he decided to go Iowa or bust.

*** On The Trail: The day after the GOP debate, Giuliani travels to Minnesota and Illinois; Huckabee campaigns in New Hampshire and appears on FOX and Friends in the morning; McCain is in DC then raises money in California; Romney fundraises in New York; and Tancredo holds a town hall meeting in Merrimack, NH. On the Democratic side, Dodd holds a conference call with reporters to discuss his legislation to reform sub-prime lending practices; Edwards picks up the Transport Workers Union’s endorsement in New York; and Obama holds a town hall in Las Vegas before heading to San Francisco.

Countdown to LA GOV election: 44 days
Countdown to Election Day 2007: 61 days
Countdown to LA GOV run-off (if necessary): 72 days
Countdown to Iowa: 130 days
Countdown to SC GOP primary: 135 days
Countdown to Tsunami Tuesday: 152 days
Countdown to Election Day 2008: 425 days
Countdown to Inauguration Day 2009: 502 days

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

BUSH SUCKS...LET'S IMPEACH...BUSH SUCKS...LET'S IMPEACH. REPUBLICANS SUCK .HA HA ! ASK CRAIG.
Paul=passion, patroitism, problemsolving.  now there is a fact VAN!!!  Are you listening????
Another Clinton "MONEY Scanel" on the way..she will be the Deomocratic vesion of Craig or worse.  There is so much sh-- in that closet who knows what will fall out next

Clinton in Court
Posted September 6, 2007 | 11:50 AM (EST)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Read More: Breaking Politics News, Hillary Rodham Clinton

         

In a story that could likely go under the radar, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton will be in court tomorrow (Sept. 7)...well, in a manner of speaking. More precisely, a California appeals court is being asked to reinstate her as a defendant in a suit. Paul v. Clinton features Mr. Peter Paul, a Hollywood-businessman-turned-bitter-campaign-contributor (see his site here) against the Senator, Mr. Clinton and several members of the Senator's campaign. Mr. Paul is being represented in his suit by the United States Justice Foundation.

The bare-bone facts surrounding the case have to do with Mr. Paul's agreement to help raise money for Clinton's Senate campaign in 2000 (see his amended legal complaint for all the details here). Mr. Paul was the executive producer of the "Hollywood Tribute," a star-studded farewell dinner and concert tribute for Mr. Clinton that raised funds for Senator Clinton's campaign in 2000. Paul claims to have contributed at least $1.9 million to underwrite event expenses (which is considered "soft money" and provides a way candidates can get around the $2,000 "hard money" or direct contribution limit). In exchange for his donation, Mr. Clinton was apparently going to work for Mr. Paul and his companies as a rainmaker for one year. Mr. Paul's suit claims that Mr. Clinton committed fraud by agreeing to work but never really intending to do so, and that Senator Clinton was aware of this arrangement (and thus should be liable as a "conspirator").

Mccain/Thompson ticket.  That would be a winner and the best for our country right now
Ron Paul was and is the winner!
**** IT'S OFFICIAL **** BUSH SUCKS !
***News Alert***Just off the wire..Bush continues to suck !
Americans still have their heads in the sand. Were you listening carefully ? Everyone BUT Romney endorsed going to war with Iran!! Another "Pre-emptive strike"? Are you kidding me? HELL NO I WON'T GO becuase there will be a draft coming to your town soon people ! Are we not currently involved in a little quagmire right now and possibly for decades to come ? WAKE UP AMERICA !! WAKE UP !!
Ron Paul seemed to me the only sane man on that stage. Anyone not outraged by the tremendous failures of GOP "leadership", is either delusional or spending too much time in Limbaughs' medecine cabinet.
There is a developing story on Fox News that we may be attacked again on the sixth aniversary of sept 11.
Multiple victories scored by Ron Paul tonight in Fox Republican Debate:

Ron Paul Wins Fox News TV viewer poll (phone text messaging)
Ron Paul 33%;  Huckabee 18%;  Giuliani 15%;  McCain 14%;  Romney 12%;  

Ron Paul Wins MSNBC Online Poll by a Landslide
Who showed the most leadership qualities? Ron Paul 70%; Giuliani 8%; Romney 7%.

Ron Paul Wins World Net Daily Post Debate Poll with 37% of the vote.

Ron Paul Photo, Headline and Story Featured on Cover Page of www.abcnews.com

Ron Paul Makes Top Headline “In the News” on Cover Page of www.yahoo.com

Ron Paul named in headline on Front Page of Google News Home Page

Ron Paul named in headline featured on Front Page of London Guardian Latest World News Online

Ron Paul’s name mentioned on front page of www.cbsnews.com

Ron Paul’s name mentioned in the first line of the MSNBC story on the debates.

Ron Paul’s name mentioned in headline on debate story at US News and World Report.

In summary, Ron Paul won this debate hands down, and Ron Paul has elevated himself to where he is an undisputable top tier candidate and one of the frontrunners for the Republican nomination and Presidency.

http://www.RonPaul2008.com
Huckabee: One nation under Hillary

Is this what passes for a Republican battle cry these days?
Sierra - Biden IS an expert when it comes to foreign affairs.  He has been in the Senate since 1972, at the ripe old age of 29.  If I am not mistaken, much of that time he has been a member and is now the Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.  Tell me, what qualifies you to judge his expertise on foreign policy?
Multiple victories scored by Ron Paul tonight in Fox Republican Debate:

Ron Paul Wins Fox News TV viewer poll by a Landslide (phone text messaging)
Ron Paul 33%;  Huckabee 18%;  Giuliani 15%;  McCain 14%;  Romney 12%;  
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,295969,00.html

Ron Paul Wins MSNBC Online Poll by a Landslide
Who showed the most leadership qualities? Ron Paul 70%; Giuliani 8%; Romney 7%.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18963731/

Ron Paul Wins World Net Daily Post Debate Poll by a landslide with 37% of the vote.

Ron Paul Photo, Headline and Story Featured on Cover Page of www.abcnews.com

Ron Paul Makes Top Headline “In the News” on Cover Page of www.yahoo.com

Ron Paul named in headline on Front Page of Google News Home Page

Ron Paul named in headline featured on Front Page of London Guardian Latest World News Online

Ron Paul’s name mentioned on front page of www.cbsnews.com

Ron Paul’s name mentioned in the first line of the MSNBC story on the debates.

Ron Paul’s name mentioned in headline on debate story at US News and World Report.

In summary, Ron Paul won this debate hands down, and Ron Paul has elevated himself to where he is an undisputable top tier candidate and one of the frontrunners for the Republican nomination and Presidency.

http://www.RonPaul2008.com
After last night's debate, I will vote for Ron Paul. His ideas are much more coherent and accurate to the historical soul of this country.
Wow, Ron Paul won another non-scientific poll. Means zilch, which is why you don't see it. That quack already gets more than enough attention.

" It’s his time to shine, and if there was ever an opening for someone to virtually come out of nowhere and win the GOP nod, this is it. But those rough three months have left him with little margin for error here on out. "  This is the lazy, inside-baseball view. People still aren't really paying attention. Nothing that happened this summer will hurt Fred.

And the reason Biden can't get traction is because he's too intelligent for Democratic primary voters.
Hillary's New Scandal
(from the Huffington Post):

In a story that could likely go under the radar, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton will be in court tomorrow (Sept. 7)...well, in a manner of speaking. More precisely, a California appeals court is being asked to reinstate her as a defendant in a suit. Paul v. Clinton features Mr. Peter Paul, a Hollywood-businessman-turned-bitter-campaign-contributor  against the Senator, Mr. Clinton and several members of the Senator's campaign. Mr. Paul is being represented in his suit by the United States Justice Foundation.

The bare-bone facts surrounding the case have to do with Mr. Paul's agreement to help raise money for Clinton's Senate campaign in 2000. Mr. Paul was the executive producer of the "Hollywood Tribute," a star-studded farewell dinner and concert tribute for Mr. Clinton that raised funds for Senator Clinton's campaign in 2000. Paul claims to have contributed at least $1.9 million to underwrite event expenses (which is considered "soft money" and provides a way candidates can get around the $2,000 "hard money" or direct contribution limit). In exchange for his donation, Mr. Clinton was apparently going to work for Mr. Paul and his companies as a rainmaker for one year. Mr. Paul's suit claims that Mr. Clinton committed fraud by agreeing to work but never really intending to do so, and that Senator Clinton was aware of this arrangement (and thus should be liable as a "conspirator").

Not content to swindle investors at Whitewater, Hillary has been caught in a new scam .......
If she becomes President, she can pardon herself, her husband, Norman Hsu and Mark Rich (again) !!!

There's a lot riding on this election !!

Ron Paul is the only candidate that will save this nation!

It saddens me greatly to even say such a thing.

Ron Paul 2008 4 President
All I can say is I wish we were more like the British. They have been hit atleast 3 times...a much smaller country...and they do not fear. They aren't trying to strip rights and freedoms away from citizens. They want their soldiers home. They aren't trying to hide behind politicians in fear. I wish our country was more like that, like we used to be. If our soldiers can face death, certainly we can(the vague chance) and not foreit or constitutional rights and give into reactionary leadership. More people die every year from DUI, drugs, and suicide than the prospect of more terror attacks. Not only that if we actually inforced our existing laws and spent money in homeland security, and spent more resources in dismantling terrorist networks (in good faith with the nations) instead of thugs in Iraq....it can be avoided altogether. The real cowards are the ones who support the political opportunists who push war that flies in the face of common sense and the will of Americans.
Once again, you corporate shills are dissing Ron Paul. What's the matter... does he not fit The Plan?
".....J Merle, you sure write about the GOP a lot for someone that isn't too worried about them.

Maybe you are worried?  Maybe just a little?  Maybe more then a little?

msg, West Virgina (Sent Thursday, September 06, 2007 11:44 AM)....."
******************************************************
No msg, I'm not worried at all about the GAY OLD PEDAPHILES. Ha, Ha...Not even one little bit.
There is a big difference between "worrying" about the G.O.P., and excersizing a constitutionally guaranteed right (free speech) in a forum that provides for free expression.
But, ah.....I see you're a fan of mine and I always try to answer my fan mail.
I don't write about republiCANTS exculsively.
But, whatever I did write about them in the past apparently struck enough of a nerve with you, that you felt you had to respond.
That's good. It means someone is paying attention. I hope I've left as much of an impresssion on others as I have on you.
Thank you once again for your interest in my posts.
Carrie--

You're right about Sen. Biden's having been in the Senate for 30+ years.  He accumulated a lot of foreign policy experience there, to be sure, and he makes a great deal of sense on Iraq and related issues to this disaffected constitutionalist Republican.

I think, however, that he was elected to the Senate at age 29, but didn't take office until after his 30th birthday (Senators must be at least 30 years old under the Constitution).  He was, however, the youngest Senator when he took office.
How can you say there where three winners last night, and not one of them Ron Paul???!?

The poll's clearly showed there was only one winner, and that was Dr. Ron Paul, scoring more then double the votes of the runner up.

Please try to be more fair and balanced with your reporting.
@@@@@@@@@  B  U  S  H    S  U  C  K  S  @@@@@@
THE DEMS ARE GETTING WORRIED.  THEY NOW SEE THEY HAVE BEEN DEALT A LOSING HAND OF CANDIDATES.  IT WAS ALL FUN AND GAMES, UNTIL NOW.  
BUSHIE BOY SUCKS !
Richard Fifield you are right Biden turned 30 prior to being sworn in, but on election day in 1972 he was 29, and he turned 30 prior to January of 1973.

Chuck Todd has probably never been to a Biden event, and yet he is able to claim Sen. Biden hasn't been getting any traction, I'm sure he said the same thing in Sept. of 03 about Sen. Kerry when he was at the same place (in terms of % and placement of candidates based upon polling) It wasn't true in 03, and isn't true now. Significantly more people are turning out to hear Sen. Biden and ask him questions, than for anyone other than Obama, and Hillary and Bill. Hillary hasn't really done many open events without Bill in Iowa (she has been to multi-candidate forums/events) so you can't really gauge the crowds she could pull in on her own. However because the press (local as well as national) is not covering the candidates other than Obama, Clinton, and Edwards, they have no clue as to the traction or lack of traction a candidate has.
SIERRA - the more you complain about Biden the more juvenile you sound.  
You are so wrong on Biden that you actually are helping his cause.  
Have you ever heard of Kosovo?  Google that and see which presidential candidate was key to that success.
Or, you could Google the Violence Against Women Act and find out which Presidential candidate wrote that Federal law.
Or, Google the name Robert Bork and see what Presidential candidate's name appears......
Grow up and get sane.

Hillary will be a nightmare.....now that Bill is dating again.  
Ron Paul was the biggest winner in this debate.  He won the text message poll, his donations skyrocketed right after the debate, his website was one of the most searched terms on Google, even his unofficial forum website received more hits than the other candidates official websites.
Isolationist and libertarians are selfcentered and selfabsorbed people who are only interested in and aware of their immediate surroundings and the resources contained within those surroundings that meet their wants and needs. The rest of the world does not exist as far as they are concerned. The America First isolationist movement reached it's peak during the 1930s and was repudiated by the events of World War II and the Cold War. With a lot of planning and a lot of resources a libertarian lifestyle can be achieved in the modern world with moderate success. However, in reality a libertarian lifestyle is a romantic fantasy which ceased to exist in this country over a 100 years ago. Ron Paul is a naive fool who cannot or does not want to understand the complex and dangerous world in which we live. His candidacy possess a grave danger to this nation and should be challenged and soundly rejected.  
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then the attack you, and then you win.

RON PAUL REVOLUTION IS HERE!
There's a developing news story that we have yet to find bin Laden.
Thank you, Sara.  I thought I remembered correctly, though it was a long time ago.

Your comments about campaign coverage point up what seems to be a serious problem with the campaign heating up as early as it has.  Right now there are so many candidates in each party running that it is difficult to cover them all.  The media have, therefore, "anointed" favorites based on whatever criteria they've chosen (polls [which of course are name-recognition- and publicity-driven], etc.).  They then give the lion's share of coverage to these "anointed" frontrunners, which sucks the air away from the others (creating a self-fulfilling prophecy).  In the Democratic race, the "anointed" are Clinton, Obama and Edwards; for the Republicans, it is Giuliani, Romney and McCain.

From a resource management standpoint, doing this makes some sense for the media.  But from a public education standpoint, it is, of course, egregiously unfair to the other candidates, who cannot get their message out (on Wednesday I watched my first debate [the Republicans in NH], and I was distressed that the bulk of the questions went to the "big three," with almost none being directed to the "bottom three" [Hunter, Paul and Tancredo])(I suspect the same thing happens in the Democratic debates as well).

I wish I knew what the solution was to this.  The process narrows the choices for all of us, since most of us have to get our info from the media.

Suggestions, anyone?  
William--

As a constitutionalist libertarian I take offense at your characterization of "...libertarians are selfcentered and selfabsorbed etc."

It is neither self-centered nor self-absorbed to seek to maximize personal liberty for ALL people.  In fact, it is the essence of the American political, legal, and social systems.  If anyone reads and understands the Constitution, that is abundantly clear.

I'd agree that isolationism won't work in the modern world, particularly for the world's only superpower.  If Rep. Paul's candidacy has a failing, that is it.  But his libertarian philosophy is NOT unworkable, unless one believes (as I do not) that government has the duty to guarantee "security" of all sorts, even in derogation of liberty.  Someone accepting that premise will never understand libertarianism, because libertarianism takes the position that government should guarantee liberty, and not worry about providing what it has no power or ability to provide.  In most cases, that is "security," whether external, internal or personal.  For government to guarantee all forms of security requires the individual to surrender all power and control to government, which will then create neither liberty nor security.



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):

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=347302

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google