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): Is Hillary too scripted?

Posted: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 9:13 AM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under:

The toplines of the New York Times/CBS polls: In Iowa, Clinton is at 25%, Edwards at 23%, and Obama at 22%, with Richardson the only other Dem in double digits at 12%. In New Hampshire, Clinton leads with 37%, followed by Obama at 22%, and Edwards at 9%.

The Times: "Democratic voters in Iowa and New Hampshire — the states that begin the presidential nominating battle — say Senator Barack Obama and John Edwards are more likely than Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to say what they believe, rather than what they think voters want to hear. But they also view Mrs. Clinton as the best prepared and most electable Democrat in the field, the polls found."

CLINTON: The Los Angeles Times’ news analysis asks this question: "Is Clinton campaign too scripted?" "No presidential campaign likes surprises, but Clinton's operation may be unmatched in its discipline. The current front-runner for the Democratic nomination hews to her message and avoids messy campaign leaks and personnel drama. Still, by planting questions at what are supposed to be unscripted question-and-answer sessions with Iowa voters, Clinton may have fed perceptions that her campaign is too programmed for its own good, Democratic strategists said.”

More: “The episode followed a Democratic debate in Philadelphia where Clinton was widely faulted for offering ambiguous and perhaps overly calculated answers on Iraq, immigration and Social Security."

The Boston Globe: “In the past week, the Democratic nomination fight has become more of a referendum on the Clinton years and whether Bill Clinton brought the good life to middle-class Americans or squandered eight years in compromise and scandal.”

The New York Daily News says the student who asked the planted question “said Tuesday the staffer who gave her the question took it from a sheet in a binder that had seven other questions for people to ask.”
 
On the heels of a poll showing Spitzer’s approval rating plummeting and a lack of public support for his driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants plan, the New York governor is now scrapping the plan.

A new Quinnipiac poll in Ohio, meanwhile, shows that new Clinton supporter, Gov. Ted Strickland (D), might not help if he's on the ticket. "Strickland was overwhelmingly elected in November 2006, only 13 percent of Ohio voters, including 20 percent of Democrats, are more likely to vote for the Democratic ticket next year if Strickland is running as Vice President. Eleven percent of voters say they are less likely to vote for a Strickland ticket and 68 percent say it won't affect their vote."

The Hill takes a look at campaign spending by state, and notes that Clinton has increased her spending in South Carolina. 

EDWARDS: The Los Angeles Times looks at the new Edwards Iowa is seeing: "When Edwards first ran for president in 2004, he told Iowans that if they were looking for a candidate who would attack fellow Democrats, ‘I'm not your guy.’ But in a series of recent appearances in Iowa, Edwards peppered his speeches with barbs about his primary competitors, particularly front-runner Clinton.”

“Iowans embraced Edwards in the 2004 race, pushing him to a second-place finish in the caucuses that helped him land the nomination for vice president. Now, most analysts agree that Edwards must win Iowa's caucuses on Jan. 3 to have a shot at the 2008 nomination. Some voters are welcoming his tactics, saying candidates need to differentiate themselves. But others wonder whether Iowa voters will align themselves with a candidate who attacks his rivals."

The former North Carolina senator becomes the first Dem candidate to make a major TV buy in South Carolina. The ad is Edwards speaking in front a textile mill that his father worked in. 

“Edwards drew flak Tuesday for a new TV ad in which he says he would cut off health insurance from members of Congress if they didn't pass a universal health care plan within his first six months as president,” the Des Moines Register writes. The Clinton campaign called it “unconstitutional gimmickry,” and the Register contacted Edwards by phone and “acknowledged that a president would not have the power to unilaterally pull health care coverage from federal employees or members of Congress.”

OBAMA: The Chicago Sun-Times' Sweet reports that Obama yesterday “disclosed the amounts his very top fund-raisers -- called bundlers -- are pulling in for his presidential campaign. Initially, Obama's campaign revealed the names of people who raised at least $50,000 for him; now the campaign is disclosing the elite superbundlers -- those raising $100,000 and $200,000. There are 327 Obama superbundlers, including couples listed as a single unit.”

“Obama is disclosing more information than chief rival Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) is willing to reveal about the amounts her top players are raising. Clinton's campaign puts out a list of her "Hillraisers," bundlers who are responsible for generating at least $100,000.”

At Google headquarters today, Obama will unveil his innovation and technology agenda. He will say, per excerpts his campaign gave First Read: “To seize this moment, we have to use technology to open up our democracy. It’s no coincidence that one of the most secretive Administrations in history has favored special interests and pursued policies that could not stand up to sunlight. As President, I’ll change that. I’ll put government data online in universally accessible formats. I’ll let citizens track federal grants, contracts, earmarks, and lobbyist contacts. I’ll let you participate in government forums, ask questions in real time, offer suggestions that will be reviewed before decisions are made, and let you comment on legislation before it is signed. And to ensure that every government agency is meeting 21st century standards, I’ll appoint the nation’s first Chief Technology Officer.”

The Columbia State front-pages Obama’s chances in South Carolina, and it encapsulates what he needs to do in the state: “Obama’s key to victory is distinguishing himself from front-runner Clinton -- particularly in the eyes of African-American voters … who are expected to cast about half of all Democratic votes and who hold allegiances to the Clinton name.”

The San Francisco Chronicle’s Carla Marinucci argues that Obama’s next campaign move has to be to cross the racial divide in order inspire people of all races as the Democratic nominee. This jump in campaign strategy involves bridging the gap between simply being a distinguished presidential candidate and becoming “the Tiger Woods of American politics.” 
 
RICHARDSON: Per his campaign, Richardson last night attended a fundraiser tonight hosted by former Chrysler head Lee Iacocca -- who has endorsed the New Mexico governor -- and actor Martin Sheen. The event was held at Iacocca’s home in California, and it featured more than 100 Hollywood VIPs, including Jon Feltheimer, Co-Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Lionsgate; Steve Papazian, President, Worldwide Production, Warner Bros. Pictures; and Ed Lammi, executive vice president of production at Sony Pictures Television.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Hillary is toast!
But they also view Mrs. Clinton as the best prepared and most electable Democrat in the field, the polls found."

Of course Hillary is best prepared....
When you have people planted in the audience asking the right question, how can you go wrong.
Because she did not have planted questions in Philadelphia, that's why she was unable to answer even the most basic questions....


“In the past week, the Democratic nomination fight has become more of a referendum on the Clinton years and whether Bill Clinton brought the good life to middle-class Americans or squandered eight years in compromise and scandal.”

What good life to the middle class??????
Bill I am still waiting for that middle class tax cut you promised and later lied through your teeth about!


On the heels of a poll showing Spitzer’s approval rating plummeting and a lack of public support for his driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants plan, the New York governor is now scrapping the plan.

Guess the light bulb finally turned on in Spitzers brain.


“Obama is disclosing more information than chief rival Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) is willing to reveal about the amounts her top players are raising. Clinton's campaign puts out a list of her "Hillraisers," bundlers who are responsible for generating at least $100,000.”

Not to be concerned.....
I'm sure it will all come out during the federal investigation once Norman Hsu gets his immunity deal.


"...the Democratic nomination fight has become more of a referendum on the Clinton years and whether Bill Clinton brought the good life to middle-class Americans or squandered eight years in compromise and scandal.” - The Boston Globe

But the fact is that both are true.  What people have to decide now, looking forwards, is whether we believe we are capable of having the former without the latter.

As to Strickland not offering Hillary Clinton much of a VP boost, this should be no surprise no matter who the Presidential candidate in question, and it goes to the fact that a VP choice does not bring their own draw as much as how they complement the appeal of the top of the ticket; Edwards couldn't give Kerry any votes in the South in 2004 when those people didn't want to vote for John Kerry, after all.  In the case of Al Gore, he reinforced the young change vibe of the '92 Bill Clinton campaign, whereas Cheney was a more senior choice because that was needed at the time to counterbalance George W. Bush in the eyes of many conservatives.  2008 will likely be another change election where reinforcing the appeal of a younger President makes a lot of sense, which suggests the strongest general election ticket possible would be Obama/Edwards or Edwards/Obama.  I used to be doubtful that such a combination would be ideal, moreso preferring a Clark or Webb VP nomination, but Webb's cave in to FISA and Clark's cave into Kyl-Lieberman to protect Hillary Clinton made me realize that a double shot of youth is probably the best ticket anyone could offer.
'"Democratic voters in Iowa and New Hampshire — the states that begin the presidential nominating battle — say Senator Barack Obama and John Edwards are more likely than Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to say what they believe, rather than what they think voters want to hear...'

I guess the voters are catching on.
This is why National polls MEAN NOTHING !!
People aren't paying attention, nationally.

Iowa and NH voters are paying attention.
Iowa and NH are like the canaries in the coal mine
Hopefully, the tide is turning
I'm waiting for this weeks debate !!
It will be critical !!

Bye, bye Hillary !!

Hillary Clinton, cold, calculating, dishonest, unethical
Hillary Clinton is too scripted (so the news media says today)...probably too uncripted tomorrow...her laugh, her clapping, her cleavage. Then we heard coverage of Ms. Obama's comment about how Barak snores andd farts in his sleep (too stinky for his daughter to go to HIS bed). Oh, please.  You sound like little gossipy Chrissie Matthews. Aren't there any REAl quality journalist out there who will write stories about how the candidates stand on the issues that will touch our lives during the next four years.    
This is perhaps the best so far that I have heard from a presidential candidate: Obama said, "As President, I’ll change that. I’ll put government data online in universally accessible formats. I’ll let citizens track federal grants, contracts, earmarks, and lobbyist contacts. I’ll let you participate in government forums, ask questions in real time, offer suggestions that will be reviewed before decisions are made, and let you comment on legislation before it is signed. And to ensure that every government agency is meeting 21st century standards, I’ll appoint the nation’s first Chief Technology Officer.”

Where are all these contracts money going? It will of great interest to have open access ..........
Bush cleaved to his message tightly as well--at Rove's behest--for both of his campaigns. He took every opportunity to turn every question or comment to which he responded into a way to regurgitate his on-message talking points.

So let's recap all the ways in which Hillary's campaign and rhetoric resembles Bush's Rove-driven campaigns and rhetoric:

* Scripted answers--check
* Planted questions--check
* Always-on-message--check
* Accusing opponents of doing what one's own campaign is doing (planted questions)--check
* "Tough", Bush-Cheney "diplomacy"--check

Face it: anybody who supports Hillary supports four more years of the same thing we've had for the last 7.

It's time to move on. It's time to support candidates who will bring genuine change from a genuinely held set of principles. It's time to move on beyond the establishment, conservative DLC Democratic strategy of being Republican-lite that only serves to undercut truly left-of-center Democrats' agendas and empower the agenda of the far-right.
The referendum on Bill is a legitimate question for other campaigns.
While Bill did okay as a president, he was not a good or great one.  He frequently threw the party under the bus to appease the republicans.  The saying goes:  Clinton was the best president the republicans ever had.  His policies turned out to be a disaster for the middle class, once the cover of the internet boom settled down.
what put Bill into this myth catagory is the fact that silicon valley provided the economic boom during his years in office, along with him being the only democrat to be in office for the past 30 years.  Bill also had the fortune to be followed by the worst president in history.
what is not told is the reason Bill was the only democrat in office is that the party veered away from their usual pattern in choosing a nominee over the past 30 years.  Usually they picked the head over heart candidate that did not excite the party to come out and vote or spur any crossover.  Bill was the one case of heart over head.  And that is why he won.
heart always wins over mind but, the democrats cannot seem to figure that one out.
All,

Being/not being scripted is NOT the issue!!!

Whether she is lying by denying IS the issue.
Using plants is a Bush tactic!  It looks like Hillary "Republican Lite" is becoming Republican Dark!  DEMS, DON'T NOMINATE THIS ALMOST-REPUBLICAN, NOMINATE A TRUE DEMOCRAT WITH TRUE DEMOCRATIC IDEALS!!
The argument that Obama is not "experienced" or "not ready" to be president is becoming tiresome. His ideas are amazing and the extent to which he is willing to reject special interests and be open with the public is unheard of in current politics. Can you imagine Bush and Cheney posting data from their infamous energy meetings on the web? The Clintons wouldn't do it either.

I see Hillary as completely status quo. Certainly  not doing as much damage as a Republican but not  making any real progress either. For one thing she would be constantly distracted by personal attacks from the right. Do we really want to go through all that again? And as far as even getting elected, just tool around on a site like Redstate.com. From the comments you can tell they are concerned about the polls beginning to shift. They would much rather run against Hillary than Obama.

There is such a thing as the right person for the right moment. Obama might not be the same man in eight years. He might be exactly who we need right now.  



GO OBAMA!!

Let's get Hillary out of there!!
How she has more than 1% in any poll is beyond me. I dont get how the rest of America cant see how bad she would be for the country!

GO OBAMA!!

"I don't want to pit red American against blue America. I want to be President of the United States of America." - Barack Obama
Hillary could answere any question one asked her without hesitation.  She doesn't have to be scripted as some of you wish.  Hillary has a brain and has used it intelligently all of her life.  What'swrong with "standing by her husband" when he was being trashed by the right wingers? What has Obama given back to his country?  All the pundits, an especially, Chris Mathews, are piling on in regards to Hillary.  Every other breath he takes is "Hillary is slipping".  Now, we find out that Edwards cheated in the last election by getting votes.  Is that what might happen with Obama and Edwards...they may have promised each other a VP ticket if the other cooperates in the trenches.  Now, Chis, is tearing down Hillary clapping - before it was her laugh.  A blog in Washinton Post had her "boots" showing too much.  Give us a break and report real news for a change.  
Class Warrior, David TX, all the John Edwards supporters, all the 'Hillary Haters' that post here.  Are you implying that the hundreds of thousands of Hillary supporter, myself included, are all republicans???  That we're 'not real' dems even though we voted for this party all our lives?  If we're all stupid enough to be fooled by a corrupt lying republican do you even want us in your party anymore?  The rhetoric is getting way out of hand in these primaries, getting personal is not going to get anyone in the whitehouse except the GOP.  Everyone is talking about 'Rovian' tactics being used by Clinton, but the one I see the most is the one they used against McCain in 2000 and Kerry in 2004, hit someone's character hard enough, say it loud enough and repeat it over and over and people will believe it.  And it's being used against Clinton, not by her, she's been very positive towards the other candidates so far even with them calling her every name in the book.  I respect that.
The nation, the world, and the Democratic contenders  are not the same as they were in 2004, and it does not concern me in the least that Edwards is illuminating critical points of difference between himself and Mrs. Clinton, even though he was perceived by the press as being "nice" in 2004. Edwards has learned some lessons that Obama has not yet had an opportunity to learn. If Obama had more experience, he would not be so wishy-washy.
More on the plant...seems maybe Hillary knew more about what was going on than she led on

Gallo-Chasanoff said the staffer signaled Clinton to call on her and another man in the crowd, among others.
Sure enough, when Gallo-Chasanoff raised her hand, the candidate called on her and she asked the question exactly as printed. See the video here, including Clinton's perfectly formatted response, noting how it's always young people who ask that question. What an amazing coincidence, eh?
According to the new CNN interview, the staffer approached Gallo-Chasanoff and asked if she'd like to ask Hillary Clinton a question. The student pondered it a moment and said, yes, she'd like to ask how Clinton's energy plan differed from other candidates. "I don't think that's a good idea," the staffer replied, "because I don't know how familiar she is with their plans."
He then flipped open a binder to a page with about eight questions on it, Gallo-Chasanoff says. At the top was one marked: (College Student). He ripped that one off and gave it to her: "As a young person, I'm worried about the long-term effects of global warming. How does your plan combat climate change?"
Gallo-Chasanoff said the staffer signaled Clinton to call on her and another man in the crowd, among others.
Sure enough, when Gallo-Chasanoff raised her hand, the candidate called on her and she asked the question exactly as printed. See the video here, including Clinton's perfectly formatted response, noting how it's always young people who ask that question. What an amazing coincidence, eh?

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/

'Is Hillary too scripted?'

 that's a joke right?

 let me ask this, has hillary ever made a statement that wasn't taken directly from her script?
AP from Ill
  So if we just listen to Obams's "amazing" pie in the sky rhetoric, meet with our enemies, tell them we want them to change, hold hands and sing songs, the world will change and the Republicans will be so impressed they will NOT attack Obama if he is the Dem. candidate?  I'll bet you are looking for the tooth fairy to visit you tonught, too.
Mike OH:

Calm down and examine the evidence rationally.  Regardless her stance on issues, if her denial of knowlege as to "plants" proves to be a lie; Hillary should be exposed as such by MSNBC.  Disagree?
Mk, MO
  You think tht Hillary has never made a statement that is not scripted? I've heard her speak many, many times "unscripted" as you say and no one could be more intelligent, warm, with the leadership and experience we need. What about Professor "now look" Obama.  Can anyone be more boring, dull, HOLIER THAN THOU when he speaks for himself like on Meet the Press or in debates when he is not reciting his campaign prepared script?
Hillary is handling all of these negative attacks exactly as she will represent our country, with intelligence, optimism, and grace. Don't let these few loud voices get you down! Hillary '08
To mike oh: I am an Edwards supporter, not a Hillary hater. I do not hate Hillary Clinton, but I do not respect her, and I can not in good conscience support her. And I am not suggesting that the Democrats that support her are Republicans, merely that you need to wake up and pay attention to her liabilities.
David TX - I would bet my next paycheck that all the candidates use 'plants' occasionally.  It's one way to get your message out if you don't feel enough people are asking questions about a new policy or problem you want to talk about.  Plus, it was a question about global warming, who cares if it was planted?  It's a good thing to talk about, now if someone was planted to ask why Obama hates America or something mean like that, then I'd be pissed too and she would no longer be my candidate.  As far as denying goes?  Yeah, I'd want an explanation if she lied about that.  But keep in mind, telling a candidate to call on someone at these things doesn't always mean it's a plant, all the campaigns work the room before the candidate speaks and will point out this person or that person who showed up on their own with a good question.

Fired up - Where to begin ... You're not a 'Hillary hater"  but in 'good conscience' you can't support her ... 'good conscience?'  She's not satan man, she's just a candidate running for prez.  Did she run over your dog or something?  What policies of hers don't you agree with?  You support Edwards, cool, go work your a** off for him, but if she gets the nod, will you support her?  Or in 'good conscience' will you stay home and pout and let the GOP continue to run this place into the ground.  Edwards has been by far the nastiest to my candidate, but if he gets the nomination I'll be out there carrying signs and trying like hell to get him elected.  Will you?
SD, MO/ 'Mk, MO
 You think tht Hillary has never made a statement that is not scripted? I've heard her speak many, many times "unscripted" as you say and no one could be more intelligent, warm, with the leadership and experience we need. What about Professor "now look" Obama.  Can anyone be more boring, dull, HOLIER THAN THOU when he speaks for himself like on Meet the Press or in debates when he is not reciting his campaign prepared script?'

hillary 'intelligent, warm', calculating and plastic would be a more accurate description, and we already enjoy the type of leadership she offers, dictated straight from the corrupt lobbyists mouths that she sold out to, bush-lite 08, no thanks
Hillary = Bush/Cheney lite, that's why I could never in good conscience support her.  Not to mention, all this experience she claims to have is *invented* experience!  First Lady of Arkansas, First Lady at the W.H. -- any experience she gained here was given to her by hubby!  

Hillary's calculated move to NY (a state to which she had no previous ties) to run for senate just seals the deal for me.  Her campaign theme should be: Hillary, A Scripted Life
I live in Iowa, and caucused for John Edwards in 2004.  This year I won't. He is WAY TOO NEGATIVE!  I'm choosing between Hillary who can win the general, or Obama, who is somewhat inspiring even though I don't think he can win the general.
All of the candidates are scripted, except McCain, and look where he is. The candidates have to keep to the script becuase they really get nailed for any ambiguous statements they make. I am supporting Edwards because you can tell he's sharp as a tack underneath the rehearsed patter. With politicians, you have to read between the lines.
Question for tomorrow night:

Senator Clinton, what is your position on Global Warming?  The young lady in Iowa that was handed a question by your senior staff so you would look good did not work.  Seriously, what is your position on Global warming?

I'd probably end up with a target on my back like Tim Russert has on his.
mike oh - "'good conscience?'  She's not satan man,"

Then how do you explain her tail?
Fran,

That's not a tail, that's what left of Ken Starr's carreer.
I’m now totally convinced Hillary will win the nomination. Even in her toughest time and Obama and Edwards’ best time she still holds 2% lead in Iowa and bounced back to 15% in NH. Technically she is tied with Obama and Edwards in Iowa, however when you look at the data, 47% Iowans believe she can win presidency compare to Obama’s 17% and Ewards’ 20%. And 80% believe she is qualified to be president, compare to Obama 42% and Edwards 68%. Who in his right mind will elect a loser?
Seems to me the fact Edwards is at 23% and Obama 22%, means 45% of the Democrats in Iowa are against Hillary. Only 25% really support her.

I think if either Obama or Edwards dropped out, their supporters would go to the other, not to Hillary. It is apparent to me that the un-Hillary movement is very strong.

do i believe hill is scripted and planted, hell yes. do i think the top 3 are scripted, again hell yes. hill & obama loaded the jj dinner with supporters repotedly 7000 of 9000 attending to control the response. so their scripted,planted,and cushioned for response. my choice, joe biden, hardly is any of those. he's straight,improvisational, and the demo answer to mccain's straight talk of his 2000 campaign. i liked mccain then and i like biden now. biden will also gather a hugh support from independents that hill won't and is the heavyweight in the campaign on iraq,iran afgan. and pakistan.
do i believe hill is scripted and planted, hell yes. do i think the top 3 are scripted, again hell yes. hill & obama loaded the jj dinner with supporters repotedly 7000 of 9000 attending to control the response. so their scripted,planted,and cushioned for response. my choice, joe biden, hardly is any of those. he's straight,improvisational, and the demo answer to mccain's straight talk of his 2000 campaign. i liked mccain then and i like biden now. biden will also gather a hugh support from independents that hill won't and is the heavyweight in the campaign on iraq,iran afgan. and pakistan.
"Hillary could answere any question one asked her without hesitation.  She doesn't have to be scripted as some of you wish.  * * * All the pundits, an especially, Chris Mathews, are piling on in regards to Hillary.  * * *  

Luz Gallagher, ABQ, NM "

Luz, Hillary could answer questions without a script, and she doesn't need plants, however, she and her campaign are afraid she'll say the wrong thing, the wrong thing not being the correct answer, but an answer that doesn't poll well, or that opens her up to criticism. That's the problem with Hillary, not that she can't answer without a script, or needs plants, but that she either lacks confidence in her opinions, or she actually lacks cares so little about most issues that she has no firm convictions. That is not leadership!

Take a look at what John Dickerson Posted Tuesday, Nov. 13, 2007, on Slate.

"I was at the biodiesel plant in Newton, Iowa, when Hillary Clinton was asked the now-famous question that had been set up by her staff. We had just finished a tour of the facility where Clinton nodded, as all candidates do, while officials spoke so that the cameramen wearing hard hats could film her standing among tubes and vats. (This is for B-roll that makes the candidate look engaged in local issues while the television announcer talks about her trip.) Then Clinton gave a nearly hour-long policy speech before taking questions from the audience. Nineteen-year-old Muriel Gallo-Chasanoff asked: "As a young person, I'm worried about the long-term effects of global warming. How does your plan combat climate change?"
Now we know, though, that it was Clinton's staff that gave Gallo-Chasanoff that question to ask. Which makes the senator's answer amusing. "It's usually young people who ask me about global warming," she said. Perhaps it's usually young people because in the binder where a staffer showed Gallo-Chasanoff the question for her to ask, it was under the category marked "college student."
What are we to make of the flap over the planted question? It is tempting to recline into the posture that this is a phony media-generated noncontroversy, like the questions about whether Clinton did or didn't tip an Iowa waitress (a story we must denounce as frivolous but keep milking anyway). Except that exchanges between voters and candidates are supposed to be the antidote to the failings of the mainstream media—free of all of the gimmickry and game-playing. Q-and-As by nature aren't as phony as the candidate plant tour or the planned stop at a roadside diner. They're as close as we get to an honest exchange. So, politicians should pay a price when they try to game them.
George Bush debased the town-hall format with many stage-managed charades, and it's politically dangerous for a Democratic candidate to get tagged with imitating him. Clinton has answered hundreds of town-hall questions with no hint of this, and so her offense falls well short of Bush's repeated infractions. (The audience members didn't have little windup keys in their backs.) But the timing couldn't be worse for her. The last week or so, the Iowa campaign has seen a new phase, in which Obama and Edwards, her neck-and-neck rivals, have questioned Clinton's honesty in almost every news cycle, a job that used to be handed off to staffers. In his well-received speech Saturday to Iowa Democrats, Barack Obama talked about the poll-driven politics and triangulation that are code words for the worst noncorporal sins of the Clinton years in Democratic circles. Clinton already fueled this with her switchback answer about driver's licenses for illegal immigrants in the last debate. Now, she has produced an easy-to-tell anecdote that makes her look highly calculating.
And it's an anecdote that involves a real, live Iowa voter. A lot of media firestorms take place in Washington green rooms and cable chat shows, but this event took place in their state and to one of their own. When politicians pander to them, the whole idea of the sage Iowa voter gets so tedious, I want to flee to the border. But then you talk to Iowa voters and are reminded that they are thoroughly normal and do take the process seriously. You can make fun of them, but I'm not going to. After one of Barack Obama's speeches last week, Pam Schroder of Bettendorf told me that while she was leaning toward Obama, she wanted to see Clinton speak in person to give her a fair shot to make her case. Voters who take the process that seriously can't like being played with planted questions.
Did Clinton know what her staff was doing? She says she didn't. Can that be so? She answered only a handful of questions at the event, and she somehow found her way to the person in the crowd who'd been put up to the task. Either her luck is smashing, or she's fibbing. Any staffer who prints up audience questions and carries them in a neat little binder doesn't then leave it to chance whether the candidate finds the one plant in a room of 300. Campaign aides insist that this moment was an act of pure happenstance. That still means that staffers feel it's OK to freelance at confecting artifice. Shouldn't someone have hesitated and thought, yikes, this is the kind of campaign where if I get caught doing this, I'm going to get fired? Even if it never winds up on the Jumbo-Tron in Times Square?
On the other hand, more politically devious questions could have been planted. The question Gallo-Chasanoff was actually planning to ask on her own is one of them. How is your plan different than your opponents' plans? This would have allowed Clinton to then ding her rivals while looking like she was just answering a question. (Romney may have employed this very technique.)
I didn't think the question was a plant at the time. It sounded a little general and prerehearsed, but a lot of town-hall questions sound that way. Days before the controversy broke, Bhagyashree Garekar, a correspondent for Singapore's Straits Times, asked me if I thought the questions had been planted at Clinton events we had both attended. I said I didn't think so. No candidate would be so stupid. When news broke that at least one had been, I called Garekar to ask what had tipped her off, since she hadn't made it to the Newton event. "This is common practice in many foreign countries, particularly India," she said. What was supposed to be a free-flowing exchange sounded rehearsed to someone with firsthand knowledge of the practice.
I thought a question from a waitress last week in the town of Oelwein, about increasing the minimum wage, seemed far more likely plant material, because the woman was from a crucial voting bloc, and Clinton answered her so well and retold of the exchange throughout her visit. A campaign aide assures me the exchange was genuine. They should put that answer on tape: They'll be asked that question a lot from now on.
John Dickerson is Slate's chief political correspondent

"Even in her toughest time and Obama and Edwards’ best time she still holds 2% lead in Iowa and bounced back to 15% in NH."

Ana  I have a feeling that Senator Clinton has not yet faced her toughest time. As decision time draws nearer, things tend to get even "tougher."
"Seems to me the fact Edwards is at 23% and Obama 22%, means 45% of the Democrats in Iowa are against Hillary. Only 25% really support her.

I think if either Obama or Edwards dropped out, their supporters would go to the other, not to Hillary. It is apparent to me that the un-Hillary movement is very strong.

Amy B Portland, ME"

First Amy the polls in Iowa are meaningless because the publicly released polls don't poll actual caucus goers, but registered voters 80% of which have never attended a caucus. It is unlikely that 25% of people who will attend the 1/3/08 caucus are actually Hillary supporters at this time.

If Obama or Edward dropped out before the caucus, which will not happen, many of their supporters would go to Clinton, and many would go to other candidates, the belief that all of Edwards (or even a large percent) would go to Obama, if Edwards dropped out, and vice a versa, is just wrong. Many Edwards supporters have Clinton as their second choice, although more have Biden as their second, and few have Obama.
Hillary denied she knew anything about a plant! Sound familiar?  "Deny, deny, deny."  The evidence seems to suggest otherwise.  Read Muriel's interview!!  Is that the kind of character you want from your President?
Peter,
Those are all false choices being offered. There are real choices out there. Don't go with the 'most likely to win' choice. Go with the 'most likely to lead' choice. That has to go out to everyone in here.
For those of you who believe Mrs. Clinton voted for the war in Iraq only because she was lied to by Bush, read the following quote:

"There is a very easy way to prevent anyone from being put into harm’s way, that is for Saddam Hussein to disarm. And I have absolutely no belief that he will. I have to say that this is something I’ve followed for more than a decade. If he were serious about disarming, he would have been much more forthcoming. . . . I ended up voting for the resolution after carefully reviewing the information, intelligence that I had available, talking with people whose opinions I trusted, trying to discount the political or other factors that I didn’t believe should be in any way part of this decision."

Hillary addresses Code Pink, March 7, 2003.

Apparently, she performed her own investigation.  Is she a liar?  You decide.



<<First Amy the polls in Iowa are meaningless because the publicly released polls don't poll actual caucus goers, but registered voters 80% of which have never attended a caucus. It is unlikely that 25% of people who will attend the 1/3/08 caucus are actually Hillary supporters at this time.

If Obama or Edward dropped out before the caucus, which will not happen, many of their supporters would go to Clinton, and many would go to other candidates, the belief that all of Edwards (or even a large percent) would go to Obama, if Edwards dropped out, and vice a versa, is just wrong. Many Edwards supporters have Clinton as their second choice, although more have Biden as their second, and few have Obama. >>

Source, por favor?
<<Hillary Clinton is too scripted (so the news media says today)...probably too uncripted tomorrow...her laugh, her clapping, her cleavage. Then we heard coverage of Ms. Obama's comment about how Barak snores andd farts in his sleep (too stinky for his daughter to go to HIS bed). Oh, please.  You sound like little gossipy Chrissie Matthews. Aren't there any REAl quality journalist out there who will write stories about how the candidates stand on the issues that will touch our lives during the next four years.     >>

The MSM would do that, but then Hillary would have a less than zero chance of winning so much as an election for dog catcher much less President. Gossip sells news and it is so far selling Americans on Hillary. Too bad that people are beginning to come around to actually wanting to hear about issues and the like--things Hillary has really no clue about if you've watched any of the debates. She just plagarizes Obama's camp of their material and sticks her name on it. Lukcily people are catching on to that as well.
The referendum on Bill is a legitimate question for other campaigns.
While Bill did okay as a president, he was not a good or great one.  He frequently threw the party under the bus to appease the republicans.  The saying goes:  Clinton was the best president the republicans ever had.  His policies turned out to be a disaster for the middle class, once the cover of the internet boom settled down.
what put Bill into this myth catagory is the fact that silicon valley provided the economic boom during his years in office, along with him being the only democrat to be in office for the past 30 years.  Bill also had the fortune to be followed by the worst president in history.
what is not told is the reason Bill was the only democrat in office is that the party veered away from their usual pattern in choosing a nominee over the past 30 years.  Usually they picked the head over heart candidate that did not excite the party to come out and vote or spur any crossover.  Bill was the one case of heart over head.  And that is why he won.
heart always wins over mind but, the democrats cannot seem to figure that one out.

diane (Sent Wednesday, November 14, 2007 10:04 AM)

______________________________________________________

Why sure they figured it out Di, we have it all.
BILL AND HILLARY.
WE have two special people moving back into the WH!
Yes. Next question.
Lee, you should be a candidate. Your answer was concise, complete and correct.
<<Hillary could answere any question one asked her without hesitation.  She doesn't have to be scripted as some of you wish.  Hillary has a brain and has used it intelligently all of her life.  What'swrong with "standing by her husband" when he was being trashed by the right wingers? What has Obama given back to his country?  All the pundits, an especially, Chris Mathews, are piling on in regards to Hillary.  Every other breath he takes is "Hillary is slipping".  Now, we find out that Edwards cheated in the last election by getting votes.  Is that what might happen with Obama and Edwards...they may have promised each other a VP ticket if the other cooperates in the trenches.  Now, Chis, is tearing down Hillary clapping - before it was her laugh.  A blog in Washinton Post had her "boots" showing too much.  Give us a break and report real news for a change.   >>

*cleans iced tea off monitor for the 2nd time today*

Give me a break. She's more scripted than an episode of The West Wing. What do you call having people in the crowd with pre-written questions that she likely has pre-written or memorized answers to? Why won't she answer tough questions at the debates and only use them as a chance to attack the current administration? She's scripted down to what she wears everyday. If that's how she is now, can you just imagine the kind of administration she'd run?
And if you believe she's not scripted, consider this:

Her environmental plan, her healthcare plan, her plan for Iraq and Iran, including actual diplomatic efforts, were all written and proposed by: Barack Obama. If I didn't know better, I'd think he was her campaign manager given all the things he's written that she's conveniently stolen.
<<Hillary is handling all of these negative attacks exactly as she will represent our country, with intelligence, optimism, and grace. Don't let these few loud voices get you down! Hillary '08 >>

Bill?
<<Question for tomorrow night:

Senator Clinton, what is your position on Global Warming?  The young lady in Iowa that was handed a question by your senior staff so you would look good did not work.  Seriously, what is your position on Global warming?

I'd probably end up with a target on my back like Tim Russert has on his. >>

It's just too bad that we're getting a Clinton a-- kisser as moderator tomorrow night. If it were Russert or anyone from say NPR or PBS, that question would have a chance of getting asked.
And if you believe she's not scripted, consider this:

Her environmental plan, her healthcare plan, her plan for Iraq and Iran, including actual diplomatic efforts, were all written and proposed by: Barack Obama. If I didn't know better, I'd think he was her campaign manager given all the things he's written that she's conveniently stolen.
Mike K, Denver (Sent Wednesday, November 14, 2007 4:31
------------------------------------------------------
You need to supply some proof with all the lies you just posted. I can prove it is he who steals her plans.  He has smoked you people with I HOPE you don't catch me stealing from HILLARY!


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=465954

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