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



Oh-eight (D): Introducing Raffaello Follieri

Posted: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 9:16 AM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under:

BIDEN: The candidate takes his criticism of Giuliani's $9.11 fundraiser a step further, and is capitalizing on the event. The Chicago Tribune reports that Biden's campaign is asking people to register their objection with a contribution of $20.08, $200.80 or even $2,008.00. Biden campaign manger Luis Navarro writes that they have "had enough of Republican candidates exploiting 9/11 for political purposes."

At last week’s AARP forum, Biden was critical of Richardson being governor of small state New Mexico, but the Los Angeles Times' Don Frederick points out Biden's own state, in which he is a senator not governor, has a population of 853,476 versus New Mexico’s 1,954,599.

CLINTON: Has Clinton oddly benefited from low expectations throughout this campaign? One could argue that. In fact, check out this Bloomberg News report suggesting that Clinton might overtake Obama on the money front this quarter. Frankly, it's been shocking that Obama has outraised Clinton in the first half of this year. But if Clinton tops Obama this quarter (even if just by a little bit), it will be an exclamation point on what's been a great three-month run for Clinton.  

Speaking of Clinton's front-runner status, the New York Times looks at the potential downside of being in that position. "Clinton’s advisers have clearly decided that being known as the front-runner is a good thing. It is a way to corral supporters and contributors; it helps to erase the idea that she is unelectable. But the evidence suggests that it is not necessarily helpful in predicting who the Democratic nominee is going to be."

More: “The truth is, there is no evidence that the Democratic primary voters have fallen head-over-heels for Mrs. Clinton. And any event that reminds Democratic voters of the lingering concerns about her could topple her from her perch.”

The Boston Globe has an analysis of Norman Hsu's fundraising activities that shows how Norman Hsu was used to raise money for Democrats on behalf  of Clinton. "In at least some cases, Clinton or her aides directly channeled contributions from Hsu and his network to other politicians supportive of her presidential campaign, according to interviews and campaign finance records. There is nothing illegal about one politician steering wealthy contributors to another, but the New York senator’s close ties to Hsu have become an embarrassment for her and her campaign."

Could it be that all the Hsu money that found its way to other Democrats did so at the direction of Clinton folks? That's the implication of this Globe story.

Speaking of money, the Wall Street Journal looks at Bill Clinton business dealing gone bad, which was orchestrated apparently by a former personal aide, Douglas Band. "Since leaving the White House, Mr. Clinton has earned more than $40 million giving speeches, has raised billions of dollars for his own charitable foundation and other causes, and has entered into business relationships with Mr. Burkle and others. Today, heads of state, business leaders and other notables will gather in New York for the annual meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative, an organization that obtains charitable pledges from various sources. Mrs. Clinton's presidential run is likely to draw scrutiny of her husband's recent activities."   

EDWARDS: The SEIU has decided to hold off endorsing any candidate. This is more of a blow to Edwards than anyone else because he needs the endorsement to catch up on the resources front. "One board member said that a majority of board members favored Mr. Edwards, who has been outspoken on behalf of universal health coverage, one of the S.E.I.U.’s main goals. But those members, taken together, do not come from locals representing 60 percent of the union’s membership, the threshold required for the board to make an endorsement."

OBAMA: He might not be the front-runner, but he’s still drawing huge crowds.

Under the front-page headline, "Obama strives to put race aside," the Columbia State's Roddie Burris takes a look at Obama's struggle to balance race in South Carolina. He "must walk a racial tightrope, especially in South Carolina, as he fights to attract both black and white Democrats without alienating either."

The Washington Post's Ruth Marcus writes, "Last week, I saw Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama give two speeches. The first was enthralling, the second disappointing. Together, they offered a pointed reminder of Obama's undeniable promise as a politician and the fundamental, unanswered question of his candidacy: Is Obama truly the different, transformative kind of politician that he holds himself out to be?" She was impressed with the SEIU speech (had all the 2004-like convo inspiration). But she wasn't impressed with his tax policy speech, because it sounded just like every other run-in-the-mill Democratic policy speech.

Marcus concludes: "The question about Obama is not ‘where's the beef,’ Mondale's famous putdown of Gary Hart's ‘new ideas.’ It's: Where's the audacity?"

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Please...who has ever given a barn storming tax-policy speech.  Has no one heard of venue appropriate !!  Porbably, but it makes for a good reason to try and find something wrong with him.

More: “The truth is, there is no evidence that the Democratic primary voters have fallen head-over-heels for Mrs. Clinton. And any event that reminds Democratic voters of the lingering concerns about her could topple her from her perch.”

Yes...the NH polls that you guys now tout reflect that.  You love to talk about the 23 point lead.  BUT, you fail to mention that 55% of the people were undecided.  So this represents 45% of 300+ people.
The only people that have seemed to fall head over heels in love with Clinton (besides HP in Boston and Susan in Miami) is the pollsters and the media.  Still got a while to go before the game starts, kind of reminds me of how everyone said Ohio State was going to run over Florida last year. Well........

The dirtiness of the Clinton's just keeps coming and coming.  One of these days, someone is going to hit paydirt and Bill and Hillary's new address will be at Supermax in Colorado.  I'm shocked Bill didn't go Tony Soprano on the Wall Street journal like he id with GQ.

I wouldn't be surprised that they Clinton's spread a little love around the democratic party with Norman Hsu's money.  Everybody attacks my guys as the Gay Old party, but The DNC might as well stand for Dirty Nasty Clintons.

ha! DNC = dirty nasty clintons. like that one. am i the only one who hasn't gotten past that UNSOLVED MYSTERY Vince Foster supposed suicide.  why would this country put that much power in the hands of one severely irresponsible family.  was the bush experience not bad enough? norman hsu, rafaello follieri, con artist after fraud after con. they don't care about anything except what will serve their self interest. i hope american voters are paying attention.
Has anybody else noticed how Obama usually ends up at the bottom of the 'OH-EIGHT (D)' posts while Clinton is on top or near the top.  I don't want to call foul to media bias (though the Clinton camp is certainly effective at portraying it's message to the media), because I don't think it the case here--note: the names are alphabetical.  I am getting tired of reading about Klinton's Kalculated Kampaign (okay, that’s unfair to Sen. Clinton but I couldn’t resist), while the less alphabetically-inclined candidates are hidden.  Granted, in this specific case, the story on Obama is less interesting than the others, but mix it up a little bit FirstRead, huh?
Does Biden or Clinton for that matter think the anti-war vote Dems and Independents will support them blindly in the general election?

Aside from Richardson, none of the major Dem candidates have any foreign policy experience or the confidence in their own judgment to stand up to the military and political establishment and unambiguously call for a complete and prompt withdrawal from Iraq.

Biden is a minor Dem candidate who has foreign policy experience but his plan for Iraq is based on a fundamental error in judgment - until the U.S. leaves, there isn't going to be progress. Why should an Iraqi die to bring peace and security to the nation when American soldiers are stationed in Iraq?

In the end how is Biden's approach to Iraq any different than Clinton's plan? They both claim they'll end the war. Yet they will continue the occupation of Iraq. They are both hawks wanting to keep large numbers of residual forces in Iraq and their options open as President.

If HRC is the nominee, what difference will there be between her and the Republican nominee on Iraq? Both will say we need to change course and bring the war to end - but "prudently and cautiously." The Democrats will lose the advantage they have on the most critical issue of the election. And America will lose because we will continue to be stuck in Iraq for years to come regardless of who wins.
Nicholas,  I understand why these guys were relunctant to call foul on GQ, they are equally as guilty of being intimidated.  What is that phrase you guys used "real profiles in courage"
About the GQ, I think they are a bunch of Wussies.  If I were them, I would have printed the article and held it to the Clintons' to pull away from the Man of the Year article.  I mean seriously, are the Clinton Camp really going to say no to the positive publicity that that article would bring?  No, of course not, and they would be stupid to.  If GQ was smart, they would use freedom of the press to print whatever they want and hold the campaigns' feet to the fire.  And you wonder why people disapprove of the media so much (well this and Britney and OJ).  It's just an example of stupidity in the media and the Clinton Camp always winning.  You know who else always wins?  Dick Cheney!
Alright!! partition Amendment passes the senate 75 I's to 23 No's!!!
Must be tough to see the writing on the wall - regardless of how many negative attacks on the Democrats, the fact will remain the same....  The next president will be a D, and the Rs will lose even more seats in Congress in 2008.

Keep plugging, jerry et al.  Must be very depressing to know that our country will soon be back on track.
I am so proud of all the Democratic candidates!  To see them debate is inspiring.  They are all so intelligent and well spoken (Richardson is nervous at times)I love the fact that any one of them would be a GREAT President. My heart and mind swells with pride to see how far the Democrats have taken us. A woman, a black man and the token white guys!! It is amazing, we truly have come a long way!  
So many nasty, dirty, gay old men in the G O P.
The leader of the G O P is the drunk in chief who loves wars and killing soldiers and spending money like the drunken in chief that he is!
Little j salutes him every day.


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=379953

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