First thoughts: NV expectations game

Posted: Friday, January 18, 2008 9:19 AM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: First Thoughts

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, and Domenico Montanaro
*** The Nevada expectations game: Yesterday, we noted that both Huckabee and McCain were predicting wins in tomorrow's South Carolina contest. But that's hardly the case for the Dems in Nevada. In the Obama camp's statement on the federal judge upholding the caucus sites on the Vegas Strip, they said the Clinton folks "enjoyed a 25-point lead two months ago and have much of the party establishment in their camp. So, despite their inherent advantages, we are pleased this should be a close and competitive contest." In their statement, the Clintons said, "The Obama campaign has been clear in its belief that whoever wins the culinary union endorsement will win Nevada. [Did they ever say that?] We will leave it up to the people of Nevada to make that decision." Why are both sides setting expectations that they might lose? Because no one -- and we mean no one -- knows what will happen on Saturday.

*** Carolina in ny mind: Turning to tomorrow’s South Carolina GOP primary, our new MSNBC/McClatchy/Mason-Dixon poll has McCain leading Huckabee by just two points, 27%-25%, which is a bit closer than other recent SC surveys have shown. Romney comes in third at 15%, and Thompson is fourth at 13%. Meanwhile, on the Dem side, the poll has Obama with a nine-point lead over Clinton, 40%-31%. Just asking: With Obama way out in front of Clinton with African-American voters (56%-25%), but trailing both Clinton and Edwards among whites (39%-28%-20%), is South Carolina at least one contest where Edwards still being in the race actually helps Obama? It sure looks like Clinton and Edwards are splitting the white vote…

Video: NBC's Political Director Chuck Todd offers his first read on the impact of the negative campaigning going on as the South Carolina primary nears.

*** Feb. 5 is only the beginning? For those weary journos and politicos who somehow thought their Valentine's Day would be the start of a two-week vacation to recover from the primary season, think again. The odds of either nomination being settled on February 5 are getting more remote. In conversations with the major Democratic campaigns, the assumption is -- barring some bizarre game-changing moment -- that maybe 100 delegates will separate Clinton and Obama, with Edwards garnering enough delegates to play kingmaker. On the GOP side, until one candidate proves they can win three primaries in a row, it's looking more likely that at least four viable candidates will compete on February 5, making a regional delegate wash (Rudy in the Northeast, McCain and Romney splitting the West and Midwest and Huck in the South) very likely. Indeed, per a new National Journal Insiders poll, 60% of Dem insiders and 60% of GOP insiders believe that their parties won't have a de facto nominee once the Feb. 5 ballots are counted.

*** Here comes March Madness: All this means February 12 -- we'll call it Chesapeake Tuesday -- featuring Maryland, Virginia and D.C. will matter, so will the historically interesting Wisconsin primary on Feb. 19 (Washington State is that day too...), with the potential culmination on March 4 when two of the last big states finally weigh in: Texas and Ohio. Forget February 5; we’re on to March delegate madness. We're warning now so you can start pacing yourselves. Special attention to campaign schedulers: A couple of rest days after Tsunami Tuesday would be nice. After all, this isn't a sprint to February 5, but a delegate marathon...

*** The Bubba factor: Here we are, three weeks into the primary voting season and there still isn't a consensus about whether Bill Clinton is an asset or not. He gets media "on the couch" coverage today about his temper in the New York Times, which should feed the amateur psychologist chattering class cocktail circuit for the weekend. The Washington Post also weighs in on Bill's role. What's been interesting is that the former president seems to be able to make news more frequently than his candidate wife. And while many believe his news making has been a distraction, he does seem to command attention and can get negative messaging out better than Hillary. By the way, how come no one has acknowledged just how difficult it is to do what Obama is doing and that's be on the small side of a 2-on-1 game. Billary vs. Obama, not the fairest of fights, is it? Then again, as the basketball player Obama knows very well, a ball-hog can sometimes mess up a 2-on-1 fast break.

*** Mitt’s fit: Speaking of tempers, Mitt Romney -- a.k.a. Mr. Smiley -- let his show a bit yesterday. The moment could be a double-edged sword for him. On the one hand, the semantics he was attempting regarding lobbyist involvement in his campaign was ludicrous. But for a candidate that seems to never show emotion, the fiery moment may have showed a toughness and a human side that many Romney partisans believed was missing. And it's not like two of Romney's chief rivals (McCain and Rudy) have never let their tempers get the best of them.

*** On the trail: On the Dem side, Clinton holds an economic roundtable in Las Vegas and then hits rallies in Elko, Reno, and Henderson; Edwards has an event at his headquarters in Las Vegas before traveling to Oklahoma City; and Obama holds town halls in Elko and Henderson and a rally in Las Vegas. On the GOP side, Huckabee holds rallies in Aiken, Greenville, Spartanburg, and Rock Hill; McCain has rallies in Florence, Myrtle Beach, Hilton Head, and Charleston (at the USS Yorktown); Paul is in Charleston, where he has a rally and a media avail; and Thompson is in Seneca, Pickens, Spartanburg, and Greenville. And where’s Romney? He’s in Nevada -- a clear sign he’d rather focus on that state’s caucuses on Saturday than the SC primary. And Rudy? He still in Florida.

Countdown to Nevada and SC GOP primary: 1 day
Countdown to SC Dem primary: 8 days
Countdown to Florida: 11 days
Countdown to Tsunami Tuesday: 18 days
Countdown to Election Day 2008: 291 days
Countdown to Inauguration Day 2009: 368 days

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

As a woman, I'm disappointed that our first viable female candidate is only there on her husband's coattails. Even more, that her political tactics mimic those of Bush/Rove. Bill's not an asset. He's only pointing out that she can't do it on her own

DS, Dallas (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 9:34 AM)

All of this week's to-do over management style is why our country's in the mess it is. It's simple: Clinton is a typical (micro)manager while Obama is a leader. Do some research and you'll find that managers meet expectations while leaders exceed them. I want someone to lead this country back to greatness, not someone who will dictate her opinion and keep us where we are.

DS, Dallas (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 9:38 AM)

Two v one. Maybe Obama should cry because he's getting ganged up on?

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 9:40 AM)

Did it ever occur to First Read that Edwards will win in Nevada? He is running you know. There is a big push on Daily Kos for a $7 million dollar day for the Edwards campaign. Its going great so far.

Edwards 08

David, Chattanooga, Tn (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 9:40 AM)

despite Fox news effort to elect Gulliani----and --put down Huckabee, he is surging all over the U.S., i think he will win S car and win in Fla where he has polled well

dla tx (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 9:52 AM)

I thought the exchange between Mitt Romney & the reporter was interesting. I see nothing wrong with candidates getting testy with the media. They are under a tremendous amount of pressure.

What the reporter wanted was a clarification, since everyone is distancing themselves from lobbyists. The question was a legitimate one. Romney's answer was not. That's the point.

Pat, Boston, MA (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 9:52 AM)

I missed Kucinich in the debate, and will have difficulty voting in November for any of the 3 selected candidates who showed up.

Bob, Arkansas (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 9:58 AM)

This article seemed slanted in an Obama direction. I mean Bill Clinton is only getting coverage because you are covering him. Obama's wife talks in support of her husband(as she should) all the time, you just do not seem to care to cover it. Do not blame Bill Clinton because he ran a successful presidency under which the American people prospered and YOU cannot stop hanging on his every word. If the man stopped talking you would report on how he does not support his wife. You should get to have it both ways.

Chaunda, Indianapolis (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:00 AM)

The Clinton's have done everything short of getting an Obama lookalike to do something nasty for the camera in their dealings to try and derail him. Nothing has worked. Yesterday's decision shows that the power of Bill Clinton has dropped a lot since the 90's. While some people see him as a god, others (like me) see him as a man who brought such dishonor on the office that it can never be the same again. Trying to do what his so called mentor John F. Kennedy did (as far as the ladies) is concerned just shows he is even in self doubt about his own legacy. While other's can say that Bill Clinton did his job, he will always be remembered as a President who lied to a grand jury, got impeached (though acquitted) and knew where to keep a good cigar handy.

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:01 AM)

I'm absolutely sick of the decrepid smears of the Clinton campaign against Obama. The Clintons find it acceptable to all-out LIE to the American people about a fellow democrat's views. I find that absolutely disgusting. Hillary and Bill better be careful, because they very seriously risk alienating all of Obama's supporters. I know for sure that I simply will not vote for such a repugnant and dishonest candidate who smears Obama with blatant lies.

The Clintons will stop at nothing. He shouldn't have to fear answering their attacks. There's a difference between "politics as usual" and defending yourself from deceptive, disgusting people.

Obama or McCain 2009

Ron, TX (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:01 AM)

The troll Johnson misses the point, which is that Mitt's policy decisions are not impacted by long ties to entrenched Washington interests. He does have old Washington hands on his staff (which is good b/c he has to know the lay of the land to take charge) and some of them have worked as lobbyists. But there is no evidence that certain business or political interests have undue influence on how Mitt makes decisions. His assertion that this may not be the case with McCain is valid. McCain owes favors and has buddies who have his ear that do have old Washington ties. Maybe if Johnson had let Romney make his point, he would have been more clear.

txindep (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:05 AM)

The one thing missing in that Democratic race consensus of analysis by the insiders is its certain conclusion: if Edwards is the kingmaker, then Obama is the king.

Shadow, Hamden, CT (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:07 AM)

If Hillary would have said the same thing about Reagan, the Obama people would have been calling her a republican and wants to go back to Reaganomics. Please, the hypocracy from the Obama people on this post is incredible. This is politics. If you want to praise Ronald Reagan like the republicans do every chance they get, while you are running for the Democratic nomination, you should expect to get hammered on that. You want to talk about calculating, this guy is trying to get the vote in California and nothing more, by making that statement.

If you are going to tell people you are not very organized while running for President, you should expect to get hammered. Please, everytime someone says something about Obama, you guys lose your minds. I want you to look at what is going on in the rupublican race and all the dirty stuff that is going on. If you think Obama would have a free ride if he got the nomination, you better wake up. Trust me, Obama getting hammered once in a while will only help him in the long run if he gets the nomination. So stop crying everytime other candidates give him a little stick. Obama fans are just showing their age. Hillary has been dealing with bad press, most of it wrong, since 1991. We need battle tested candidates, not someone who is gonna wine all the time about old politics. That's a sure way to lose to a Republican in an election.

Stopwatchingfoxnews, Rochester, NY (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:08 AM)

I'm not a Mitt supporter, but once again the media tries to create the news. That AP reporter was out-of-line and obviously has his own bias. Reminded me of David Shuster on Morning Joe talking about how reporters aren't bias - yah right David. Shuster being one of the worst offenders, only supports my opinion that most of the reporters out there will do what they can to either dump on or praise the candidate of their choice. And to Chris Matthews who made a half apology for his sexist remarks during the beginning of his show last night, I’m not buying it since he was responsible for a lot of the racial/sexist crap spewed in the last two weeks.

Patti Hines (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:10 AM)

I'm not sure why First Read feels a compulsion to editorialize Clinton's comments and not Obama's.

Why this:
(1) they (Obama's campaign) said the Clinton folks "enjoyed a 25-point lead two months ago and have much of the party establishment in their camp. So, despite their inherent advantages, we are pleased this should be a close and competitive contest."
(2)In their statement, the Clintons said, "The Obama campaign has been clear in its belief that whoever wins the culinary union endorsement will win Nevada. (3) First Read: "[Did they ever say that?]"

Instead of asking a snarky question about the Clinton campaign's statement, why don't you READ the Clinton campaign's statement:
"...has made it clear in its belief..."

Are you actually trying to tell us that the Obama campaign NEVER made it clear that their belief was, whoever wins the culinery union wins Nevada?!!?
Whew.

In an effort to be fair and balanced, how about a snarky question at the end of Obama's statement, which implied that the Clinton camp is the only one with establishment players, or that the Clinton camp has "an inherent advantage"?

I guess Barack Obama doesn't know any Clinton Haters, or any charter members of the Rightwing Slime Machine. Inherent "advantage" my arse!

Me thinks Obama is trying to backpeddle his original expectations about his inevitability in Nevada.

And me thinks First Read is still swooning over Obama's soaring hope and wants to give him cover.

Jan, Nashua, NH (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:13 AM)

I'm tired of the media pushing a two person race on us and telling us that John Edwards has no chance. He beat Clinton in Iowa and could very well beat her in Nevada. But it's the voters who decide, not the media.
According to MSNBC delegate count-
Clinton 24
Edwards 18
Obama 25

Plus Edwards is the only candidate who will get republican crossover votes in the general election. Republicans will not crossover and vote for Clinton or Obama just like they didn't crossover and vote for John Kerry.

Wendy, PA (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:14 AM)

FIRST READ "...In their statement, the Clintons said, "The Obama campaign has been clear in its belief that whoever wins the culinary union endorsement will win Nevada. [Did they ever say that?]..."

Not outright, no.
But, they've certainly "implied" it, as has MSNBC's FIRST READ (and REPEATEDLY so) over the course of the last week.

FIRST READ..."Why are both sides setting expectations that they might lose? Because no one -- and we mean no one -- knows what will happen on Saturday."

Now, you just got done stating in a previous thread, that two seperate polls show Hillary leading in Nevada by %5, and 9%.
Then you come out with this.
Why must you spin everything so negatively against Hillary?
Doesn't sound to me like Hillary thinks she's going to lose at all.
Just sounds like she's being appropriately humble, and probably a little cautious since you media types were dead-ass-wrong about NH.
The bias, unfair coverage just never ends, does it?

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:14 AM)

[Did they ever say that?] We will leave it up to the people of Nevada to make that decision."

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

U are the media, right? How about doing Ur job and be informative, and STOP letting the Clintons have their free-lies pass!
The Obama camp never said that, and U know it!

Rep0X (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:15 AM)

Stopwatchingfoxnews...battle tested maybe but not battleaxes...old ones at that. have you looked at her and mcCain when they havn't had time to get the botox shots or air brushes...geez

Joe (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:16 AM)

I wish Obama would stop trying to reach across the aisle and concentrate on the issues and division of his own party.

Chaunda (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:19 AM)

Barack Obama should ask the following question at his next campaign stump speech: Who am I running against - Hillary Clinton or Bill Clinton?

Because from all appearances, it looks as though Bill Clinton is running for a third term.

And yes, their campaign does remind me of the techniques Karl Rove would use.

Hillary Clinton is looking warm and kind, yet at the same time, Bill Clinton is going for the gut, the knock down punch.

Who exactly is the candidate?

Pat, Boston (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:19 AM)

Obama should pick-up Hillary’s comments about foreign investments in Citi and Merrill. Hillary was against it while her chief campaign guy Mark Penn’s company represents these foreign investments. If it is Obama or Edwards in that situation both Clintons would have skewered them. Time for Obama and Edwards to bring-up these and engage actively.

To Do List (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:20 AM)

Two things on your statements today --

1) I wrote to Hillary three months ago that Bill Clinton, who up until then, had pretty much stayed out of it...AND TOLD HIM TO SHUT UP...if he wants his wife to be president.

2) I am predicting Mitt Romney to win Nevada, and I agree, dare I say it --- with Pat Buchanan that McCain absolutely needs to win S.C. to stay viable.

Barbara C., Pompano Beach, FL (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:20 AM)

What do they put in the water in Texas?

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/01/15/about_that_sc_memo.html

By Anne Kornblut
LAS VEGAS -- Tonight, Barack Obama contradicted the message that had been coming from his campaign on one point. His advisers had not previously taken responsibility for a memo from his South Carolina press secretary outlining verbal missteps on race by the Clintons. But during the debate in Las Vegas, Obama did not deny that the memo had come from his campaign, and said he would not stand by such work in the future, saying he regretted it "not only in hindsight but going forward."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/01/unite-here-divi.html

UNITE HERE Divides

January 17, 2008 7:28 PM

"Hillary Clinton does not respect our people," the Spanish voice says in the Nevada radio ad. "Hillary Clinton supporters went to court to prevent working people to vote this Saturday -- that is an embarrassment."

As reported by Kate Snow and Eloise Harper, the ad calls Clinton "shameless" and says "Senator Obama is defending our right to vote. Senator Obama wants our votes. He respects our votes, our community, and our people."

The ad -- decried by the Clinton campaign -- is from the union UNITE HERE, representing 440,000 textile, hotel and restaurant workers, which endorsed Sen. Barack Obama last week.

John Edwards campaign's deputy campaign manager Jonathan Prince, pointed out the hypocrisy of this, considering Obama's anger about the unions helping Edwards back in Iowa. (Remember THAT?)

http://www.nypost.com/seven/01182008/news/nationalnews/obama_rev_s_blow_to_bill_60735.htm

By MAGGIE HABERMAN
PreviousPauseNext
PrintEmailDigg ItRedditPermalinkStory Bottom

January 18, 2008 -- The pastor whom Barack Obama calls his spiritual guide and mentor took a stunning shot at Bill Clinton this week, saying the ex-president did the same thing to black voters that "he did to Monica Lewinsky."

The Rev. Jeremiah Wright made the remarks in a sermon to his flock at the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago.

Some say black voters should support Hillary Rodham Clinton "because her husband was good to us," he said, according to The Baltimore Sun. "That's not true. He did the same thing to us that he did to Monica Lewinsky."

"The Clintons will stop at nothing. He shouldn't have to fear answering their attacks. There's a difference between "politics as usual" and defending yourself from deceptive, disgusting people."

Indeed.

Diogenes (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:21 AM)

Judging from comments I've seen on other sites over the past couple of months, many think Bill is damaging himself and his legacy.
Maybe to some in the media it seems like Bill is being 'skillful' but, to those of us in the country we find him baffling, silly and exhausting.
What this democrat wonders is why in the world many in my party cannot see the Clintons as they really are instead of thru some gauzy unreality.

diane (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:22 AM)

It's too bad that your pro-Obama stance has to be so obvious, what happened to journalistic integrity?

Patrick, Sturgis, SD (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:23 AM)

Now THIS is a brilliant story ACCURATELY describing the uphill battle Obama is fighting. To all of the Billary-lovers, YES, Obama does have an outspoken wife, but whenever she speaks, unlike Bill, I can still tell that HER SPOUSE is running for president, not the other way around! It really does seem that Bill is trying to play the 'ball hog' in this election, but he has to remember, his WIFE is running for president!

Tell me, if Hillary is this supposed 'great and strong leader' why does she need to unleash Bill on the Obama campaign/media every time things don't go her way?

The last time I checked, the 90's are now consisdered to be the PAST TENSE! Lets move toward the FUTURE!

OBAMA '08!!!

JJ Jax, FL (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:23 AM)

stopwatchingfoxnews, you sound as bad as the republicans are with Bush when it comes to your beloved Clintons.
There are many democrats, including myself, who are so sick and tired of the whiny, petulant Clintons who expect to be treated as royalty and are entitled to whatever they want.
They are an embarrassment to many democrats and the thought of even one day of them in the white house depresses many of us.
Our country is in this mess because of the so called leadership of both the Bush and Clintons.
We need to break with these spoiled, self obsessed pols who only care about themselves and not the country.
Barack Obama is a breath of fresh air.
And he was right about Reagan making an impact on the direction of the country. And Bill failing to move it back.

diane (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:28 AM)

JUST SAY NO TO:

Monica Lewinsky's Ex-Boyfriend's Wife for President

JUST SAY NO !

Sierra, SF (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:28 AM)

Wendy
I think Edwards is a good man but to suggest that republicans will cross over and vote for him anymore than the other two candidates is not realistic.

Chaunda (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:29 AM)

From the Politico:

'...January 17, 2008

Ad: 'Hillary Clinton does not respect our people'

The radio ad aired by one of Obama's labor allies
re-injects ethnicity into the Democratic primary
contest in sharp terms.

"Hillary Clinton does not respect our people," the ad
says in Spanish (original and Clinton campaign
translation after the jump), referring to the lawsuit
that failed today to shut down special caucus sites on
Las Vegas' strip. "Hillary Clinton is shameless."

"Sen. Obama is defending our right to vote. Sen. Obama
wants our votes. He respects our votes, our community,
and our people. Sen. Obama’s campaign slogan is 'Si Se
Puede.' Vote for a president who respects us, and who
respects our right to vote," the ad says, according to
a transcript provided by the Clinton campaign and
confirmed in part by a union official.

On a conference call arranged by the Clinton campaign,
two of her supporters denounced the spot and demanded
that Obama distance himself from it. They also said
the Clinton campaign had no involvement in the
lawsuit, which was filed by Clinton supporters and
defended by Bill Clinton.

"It’s pathetic and it's sad and it's unfortunate that
they have to stoop so low," said Dolores Huerta, a
longtime Hispanic labor leader who supports Clinton.
She said she had never met Obama in her years of
working on Hispanic causes, and suggested the ad was
prompted by his lack of Hispanic support.

"I have yet to find even one worker — a Latino worker
— who is supporting Barack Obama," she said.

The political director for the textile and hotel
workers' union UNITE-HERE, Tom Snyder, confirmed a
portion of the transcript, and defended the decision
to run it.

"We're doing this because forces allied with her
campaign are trying to keep our members out of voting
through this lawsuit, which neither Senator Clinton
nor former President Clinton have denounced," he
said....'

Truer words have NEVER BEEN SPOKEN
Hillary was trying to SUPPRESS VOTES in Nevada
Her evil plot failed !!

JUST SAY NO TO:

Monica Lewinsky's Ex-Boyfriend's Wife for President

JUST SAY NO !

Sierra, SF (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:29 AM)

Obama is straight forward and truthful to the people. He told truth about our ridiculous tax code that would allow Warren Buffet to pay less taxes than his SECRETARY??!!!

Obama was against the Iraq war from jump.

His economic plan makes the most sense!! For all you Republicans and indep., even KARL ROVE SAID HILLARY’S economic plan makes no sense because she is planning to spend money we don’t have right now. (look up the article where he addressed the RNC!)

About 45% of people in Michigan voted UNCOMMITTED and thousands voted for Dodd who isn’t even in the race anymore. What does that say about Clinton? NOT ELECTABLE as she thought!

If Hillary wants to ride off her husband’s coat tails, Bill Clinton voted for the creation of NAFTA which sold out many American jobs!!

As far as her Royal Magesty of the Bush-Clinton American dynasty….Where to begin??

First, it is unfortunate Sen. Clinton is blaming Sen. Hagel for her vote for the Iraq war.

Second, Clinton claims that the country needs someone who “knows Washington from the first day of the job.” Well, what does that mean? Know D.C. insider politics, know the special interest groups and lobbyists…

HELLO, the people want CHANGE Hillary!! She still doesn’t get it!!

creation of NAFTA (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:29 AM)

Do not expect First Read to say anything positive about the Clinton's. They tout Obama night and day. I note that on AOL that Chris had to own up to his sexist remarks about Hillary. MSNBC,NBC and Newsweek all are out to hammer Hillary. Regardless of who you support, it does seem a little unfair to hold the voting in the union's work place. The shop steward will be there to make sure they all vote right.

gene britton (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:34 AM)

Jerry wrote-

"The Clinton's have done everything short of getting an Obama lookalike to do something nasty for the camera in their dealings to try and derail him."

Good one, Billary is probably holding auditions now!

Luci, Portland (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:38 AM)

If Hillary would have said the same thing about Reagan, the Obama people would have been calling her a republican and wants to go back to Reaganomics.

Considering that some of the things that Hillary has done is more in line of the GOP, one can make the assumption that Hillary really is a closet republican.

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:39 AM)

Personally, from the Dem side, I think this should be a race between Edwards and Obama. Clinton is uninspiring, awash in special interest...and frankly, although I voted for Mr Clinton twice and respect his presidency, I'm not to jazzed about the Bush then Clinton then Bush then Clinton factor; trading places in the White House for a potential 28 yrs. I hope that Edwards stays in all the way to the convention because his thoughts, ideas, and plans have been what is pushing Obama's and Clinton's ideas in the campaign

Mark Rose, Raleigh, North Carolina (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:39 AM)

Anyone who thinks Hillary stands up for unions should remember that HRC sat on the board of Wal-Mart and was partner in an anti-union law firm. Look it up if you don’t believe me. Just Google “Hillary Clinton” and “Wal-Mart” together. You’ll discover the truth about her “support” for union workers

MGC,,CA (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:41 AM)

Bill Clinton will NOT be an asset as soon as Hillary gets the nom sewn up. He has been having affairs since leaving the WH, and it's even been in the funny papers. The media will report on Larry Craig and Mark Foley, but not Clinton's post-WH affairs.

When this comes out Hillary, with already high unfavorables, will be unelectable because another 5% or so won't want Bill back in the WH embarrassing the nation once again and weakening the Democratic Party.

http://www.newyorkbusiness-risingstars.com/images/2000/402000belzbe.jpg

Clinton linked with wealthy socialite

THE tangled love life of Bill Clinton was again under the microscope yesterday when he was romantically linked with a glamorous blonde.

A magazine photo showed the former president of the United States in an intimate pose with the Canadian socialite Lisa Belzberg, 38.

They were photographed by Newsweek in front of a refrigerator at her mansion in Katonah, New York. It rekindled long-standing speculation about the pair, who have been spotted together at a number of functions over the past year.

According to the New York Post, Ms Belzberg, a millionairess separated from her husband, the Seagram alcohol heir Matthew Bronfman, about a month ago following a liaison with Mr Clinton.

...

"Friends were stunned to see the photo of Clinton in front of Lisa’s stainless steel Sub-Zero refrigerator with Jonathan Alter’s cover story on the ex-president," the paper reported. The article claimed Mr Clinton and Ms Belzberg were involved in an encounter last month.

"She was seen flirting with Clinton at the Super Bowl party he hosted in his Harlem offices," it added. At the time Mr Clinton joked of his relationship with Ms Belzberg: "She married a guy worth $6 billion, but she still likes to flirt with me."

A spokeswoman for Ms Belzberg, who runs the educational organisation PENCIL , insisted that she has not been involved in another relationship since her split from Mr Bronfman. "There is no-one else," she said bluntly.

http://news.scotsman.com/billclinton/Clinton-linked-with-wealthy-socialite.2317821.jp

According to 6/12/02 Page Six of the New York Post: WHATEVER there was between Lisa Belzberg and Bill Clinton, it appears to be over. Belzberg, the brainy blonde behind the PENCIL nonprofit group that helps the public school system, was rumored to be more than friends with the former president, who lives just 10 minutes away from the mother of two in Westchester. "She's heartbroken," said one source. But there is little chance of reconciliation with her husband, Matthew Bronfman. The Seagram heir, who split with Lisa in February, is said to be very happily dating a fashion industry executive, Stacy Kaye.

Inside Politics 6/13/02: "The New York Post reported yesterday that the relationship between former President Bill Clinton and Lisa Belzberg 'appears to be over.' If we do the math, that means that Mr. Clinton and the pretty blonde socialite lasted seven weeks. "Tabloid rumors of a romance between the two appeared around April 23, claiming the pair met at a Christmas party last year. Mr. Clinton behaved like 'a big old hound dog' and later, trysts reportedly took place in mid-afternoons on the 24th floor of New York's chichi Hudson Hotel."

John H (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:42 AM)

'... barring some bizarre game-changing moment -- that maybe 100 delegates will separate Clinton and Obama, with Edwards garnering enough delegates to play kingmaker....'

THAT WOULD WORK !!
OBAMA/EDWARDS '08

That is our STRONGEST TICKET !

Let's give the American people something to VOTE FOR

VOTE FOR HOPE

Obama/Edwards '08

JUST SAY NO TO:

Monica Lewinsky's Ex-Boyfriend's Wife for President

Sierra, SF (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:44 AM)

jerry will continue to be on the bottom rung of the people who are delusional enough to believe that The Shrub's legacy will be better than Clinton's. Your lame cigar reference and lying about an affair that millions of Americans do on a daily basis. Compare and constrast. Please that is a no-brainer for individuals that can honestly and subjectively looks at facts w/o resorting to kool-aid drinking and blinded by Fox News.

juan, ft lauderdale,fl (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:44 AM)

I completely disagree with you that Mitt employed "semantics". There's a HUGE difference between having someone provide advice and having someone actually making decisions ("running the campaign"). The reporter was playing fast and loose with the facts, and Romney called him on the incorrect premise of his question.

Not to mention the fact that it's unbelievably unprofessional to interrupt a candidate mid-answer.

I expect reporters to ask tough questions...but I don't expect them to be ugly and abusive.

Jim Knowlton, Portland, OR (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:46 AM)

P.S. Repubs. won't crossover for any of them.

ge~pa~ (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:46 AM)

FIRST READ..."By the way, how come no one has acknowledged just how difficult it is to do what Obama is doing and that's be on the small side of a 2-on-1 game. Billary vs. Obama, not the fairest of fights, is it? ..."

How about the media's "pile it all on Hillary" strategy, which FIRST READ, I'm sorry to say, has fully fed into?
How fair is THAT?
While the Clinton's may have a two-tiered-attack game plan; the media has been playing "zone defense" against them on behalf of Obama. By making commentary like the one above, and by failing to ask Obama what he means by the word "change."
He is never asked to explain what he's going to change, or how he's going to change it. The media (including MSNBC's FIRST READ) allows him to get away with all sorts of rhetoric without asking him for any substance.
Just thought I'd point this all out to you, in the spirit of promoting "fairness" and a "fair fight."

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:47 AM)

Democratic Nevada Caucus - Prediction Time!

The road to the White House now goes through Nevada because Saturday's statewide caucuses

will help to clarify presidential nomination races in both major parties.

Who do you predict will win the Democratic Nevada Presidential Caucus?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1551

.

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

Republican Nevada Caucus - Prediction Time!

Who do you predict will win the Republican Nevada Presidential Caucus?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1552

.

PollM, Dallas TX (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:47 AM)

some people will say anything to try to cover the clintons blatent lies.

ki houston (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:47 AM)

Wendy - you are so wrong about crossover votes. I know several republican voters who've never voted for a democrat who are currently supporting Obama. His appeal (I've heard) is that he may disagree, but he listens and shows respect. If the repubs want a populist, they've got Huckabee.

DS, Dallas (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:48 AM)

Sometimes, even a Republican nut case can have a good point:

From First Read:

'...Duncan will say: “Senator Clinton certainly wants us to trust her. She says she’s running on her experience and her record. But she doesn’t want to give us access to the documents that would allow us to judge that experience and that record on our own...'

WHAT ARE THE CLINTON'S HIDING ?
What's in THOSE RECORDS ?
More evidence of Clinton's corruption ?

JUST SAY NO TO:

Monica Lewinsky's Ex-Boyfriend's Wife for President

Sierra, SF (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:49 AM)

To Jan, Nashua, NH:

It was the media who equated winning the union endorsement with winning the Nevada caucus, not the Obama campaign. Once again, Senator Clinton is trying to put the words of other's into Senator Obama's mouth. Only problem is, it's not going to work.

Nashville_fan (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:50 AM)

Having a brokered convention in either/or both parties is very appealing compared to past conventions throughout the decades that were just glorified and expensive pre-ordained pep rallies.

juan,ft lauderdale,fl (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:53 AM)

Obama is looking good out there. I like Bill but he can't really think that we believe the Clinton campaign had absolutely nothing to do with that lawsuit. C'mon Bubba! By the way, can someone from Nevada please let me know the proper pronounciation of the word.

C.K. Steele Fort Lauderdale, FL (Sent Friday, January 18, 2008 10:54 AM)

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=586949