So who’s the front-runner?

Posted: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:12 PM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: 2008, Clinton, Obama, Feb. 5

From NBC’s Andy Merten
It seems that everyone wants to be the underdog, these days.

This morning on a conference call with reporters, Clinton strategist Mark Penn repeated several times that the Obama campaign is now the “establishment” campaign -- citing superior January fundraising, high-profile endorsements, and even Sunday’s Super Bowl ad.

Fast forward to less than an hour later: In a press conference in Chicago, Obama maintained that he is still the underdog. “Senator Clinton is a formidable opponent,” he said, calling her organization a “political machine honed over two decades.”

VIDEO: Sen. Barack Obama, in Chicago Wednesday, comments on Tuesday's nation-wide primaries, calling it a "big victory."

“From my perspective, this makes her the frontrunner,” he added.

So Feb. 5 has come and gone, with neither Democratic hopeful yet ready to assume the mantle of lead candidate.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

Hillary is still the person to beat in the democratic nomination. Obama has clearly gained ground. Just a few weeks ago, Hillary was suppose to be the "nominated" democratic candidate after Super Tuesday. That is, however, not the case. Although Hillary won both New York and California, Obama did very well in more states. I feel that Obama has the momentum. People will gravitate towards Obama as they get to know him more and more. This is going to be a close race all the way to the end with Obama playing catchup.

Johnson, New Orleans, LA (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:22 PM)

The hard numbers show her in the lead with the delgate situation, but it does seem that thus far he got more actual votes. After the Al Gore fiasco, Im sort of a fan of the popular vote. This delegate thing is dumb, whoever gets the most votes should win. If the margin is less than 5%, then some sort of system should be in play to account for human error. Something VERY BIG wil have to happen to sway people back or forthy. teh entire thing is very divisive

Lynette, NYC (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:23 PM)

A 100 super delegate lead? Who is the establishment candidate? Sorry, can't spin that number.

Wilson, Seattle (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:25 PM)

Obama's greed will be the downfall of the Democratic Party. If he is nominated or not he has split the party and the Republicans will win the general election. He has raised false hopes without saying what he will do other than grand generalities with no substance. Obama is a true Chicago politician - it's only the bottom line that counts and who walks off with the prize. I wouldn't expect less from one of the Nations most politically corrupt cities.

Fred Cline, Brookfield, WI (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:26 PM)

Hillary is the front-runner in name only....mathews and olberman will slant each and every story toward obama and you can see by the so-called panel of experts that come on to back up the obama slant...they don't have any positive stats or information on clinton but instead they offer stats and information on what obama needs to do to win whichever upcoming primary that is being talked about that day....hillary now faces an uphill battle for those 1300 delegates she needs

Sean Penn (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:27 PM)

Let's not fool ourselves, the Clintons have been the frontrunners from day one.

Enrique, Chicago (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:28 PM)

Clinton is the true leader of the race and will be the true leader of this country...clinton has the tools to step right in the first day and get this country back to where 'wild bill' had us when everyone was making money not just the republicans

P Overley midwest city Ok (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:29 PM)

Obama is the "establishment?" Is anyone really going to buy that?

I think the Clinton campain needs to break out those dictionaries because that makes no sense.

Brad, Morgantown, WV (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:29 PM)

“There is no doubt … we hope and pray every night to run against Hillary Clinton,” - Ari Fleischer, on CNN last night.

Hopefully they don't get their chance. Because everyone knows she can't win against McCain. The Clinton supporters are just trying to fool themselves if they think Hillary will be able to win. She will only pull die hard democrats. She'll lose the independants, all the republicans, and will not get the enthusiastic new voters and younger voters that were for Obama. They'll stay home.

What platform can she stand on against McCain? Experience? Hah! John McCain will destroy her in that area. Military? Yeah... keep dreaming. Security? McCain again. Healthcare? Maybe she gets this one. And thats not even bringing up the tons of scandals over the years since they left office. For all those that want to say she stood up to the Republican attack machine... hardly. Bill did definately. Hillary did not. Her major fight with Republicans was on health care... which she lost horribly.

J, OH (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:30 PM)

I think both Dems showed well last night! I believe this race is very different from anything we have ever seen in our lifetime and in a world that moves fast...we need to slow down and take it race by race - state by state and let the voters choose.

To all the states that have yet to have their say- stand up and be counted! :)

Independent in CA (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:30 PM)

Take out the inexperienced youth votes and the blacks voting along racial lines and you will see who is voting for Obama. When it gets down to the more knowledgeable and adult voters Obama will not win a national election. Fancy slogans can only go so far as ultimately you have to come up with more than fancy talk to get elected.

John Barnes, Overton, PA (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:30 PM)

Joyce Patterson (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:32 PM)

Obviously there isn't a front-runner. Tuesday was a wash and they both know it. This is just the expectations game.

But I must say I find myself more pleased every day with this race. I look forward to next year's Inauguration, and I may well decide to go to Washington to see it.

Steve, Hartford, CT (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:34 PM)

If Feb 5 was winner-take-all for the Democrats- Obama would be finished this morning!!!!!!! He is a lucky man- as Karl Rove said. Add up all the states he won- all the states Clinton won- make it winner-take-all and Obama gets slaughtered.

Robert Houston, TX (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:35 PM)

In the general election it will be the Democrat to try and fix the mess that Bush is leaving us with. No one wants more war and we need to pay off debt.

Marti

Martha Benner, Foley, AL (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:35 PM)

Obama has run more ads than Hillary, spent more money, and is drawing huge crowds to his events. He is claiming that he is the underdog and that people are "just starting" to get to know him. I think the media should call him on the "just getting to know" stuff.

Eric, SI, NY (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:37 PM)

Clinton won by a field goal and long term she still has the edge. Obama will get several field goals and a touchdown in the next few weeks but Clinton will probably get three TD's with Texas, Ohio and Pa. Things can change but she won NH despite the Obama "tidal wave" and she more than held her own on "Tsunami Tuesday." I also think the super delagates are probably more aligned in favor of Clinton at this time and she will probably hold the edge there unless Obama can win two out of three in Tx, Ohio and Pa.

Chris Weimar, Chapel Hill, NC (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:38 PM)

Robert, if the Democratic primaries were winner take all, Obama would have used a very different strategy, concentrating on California and Massachusetts from day 1. He didn't have much of an organization in those states because nobody thought he had a prayer, and that's what enabled Clinton to pull out bigger than expected wins. If it were winner-take-all, it would have been a very different race from the start. Obama's goal in California a few days ago was simply to keep Clinton from netting a ton of delegates...nobody believed he could win it until maybe 3 days ago, and I was skeptical even then.

Laura, Arlington, VA (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:43 PM)

I still think Clinton is the front runner. I mean, she won California, which is a major win. What did Obama win? Utah? Sorry, I live here, and I know that win means absolutely nothing at the end of the day.

Carrie, Draper, UT (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:43 PM)

I was so happy to see that Clinton won in Mass. and CA especially. All of the media hype going on between Oprah, Ted Kennedy and the flip flopper JOHN KERRY who is just a complete moron. Clinton winning in these states was a kick in the face to all of them and I was glad to see it happen. And I am sick to watch MSNBC continue to downplay the success of Clinton. She had the least amount of resources, media support and momentum and she still held her ground. I am happy for her for that.

cs ny (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:44 PM)

J in Ohio...are you on drugs?
Do you honestly put any stock in what a former Bush adminsitration official like Ari Fleischer says?
McCain would SMOKE OBama in the general election.
His grandfatherly charm, Vietnam Hero status, and moderate voting record in The Senate would galvanize The G.O.P. base, and cut into the independent votes that Obama is counting on.
Additionally, latinos would vote for McCain over Obama. They represent a larger voting block than African Americans do.
Nope, sorry, aint buying the electability thing anymore.
Because Hillary PROVED, in the face of all of Obama's endorsements from big names in the establishment, that she can still compete, and win.

GO HILLARY 2008!

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:44 PM)

I believe that Obama is the candidate of choice.
Because the clintons are grasping at straws in order to trip him up. It indicates to me that Obama is intelligent and wise. Because his past hasen't been a factor in the election. He handles himself with class and intelligence. He is a true leader who is ripe for the presidency.

Chris, Youngstown, Ohio (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:44 PM)

I think Mark Penn is just hoping that no one stops to think about the actual definition of an "establishment".

Anyone with two bits of common sense will laugh at Penn trying to act like the title "establishment candidate" can change definitions or meanings. "Establishment candidate" is an entirely different concept than "front-running candidate".

It's entirely possible for an establishment candidate to be losing a fundraising race. It's entirely possible for an establishment candidate to be losing certain high profile endorsements. This just means they are no longer winning.

Ron, TX (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:44 PM)

It's always nice to check these boards and see myself described as the "inexperienced/youthful" vote. My peers in their 30s and 40s are voting in large numbers for Obama, and we don't consider ourselves inexperienced voters. Also, to accuse black people of voting for Obama solely because of race is insulting. Despite statistic after statistic showing Clinton's huge support among women, and comment after comment from female Clinton supporters saying they're voting for her because they want a woman president, there hasn't been an overwhelming cry of misandry on these boards to equal the denegration of black voters. I don't vote with the color of my skin or with my ovaries, and I don't appreciate the implication otherwise.

Chris, MI (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:44 PM)

LOL, Hillary will say and do anything to get elected.
She blasts Obama for not having "years of experience" and now she'd like to call herself "underdog" - what a crap!!!

This is what it is all about. She cannot be trusted!!!
Yes, Hillary it was you & your campaign that injected the race and the gender card to your advantage! Shame on you!

Sean, NY (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:44 PM)

Hmmm... 2 months ago HRC was ahead by 25-30 points nearly everywhere. When it became close,she tried to lower expectations. They expected to be ahead by 400 delegates by now ... too bad. Obanma 13, HRC 8 (states) last night. Even in baseball, the closer is not needed for the last inning. This has been a steady bit gradual movement away from dishonesty & deceit, toward a fresh face that deserves a chance.A Clinton vistory would mean an automatic GOP win in November.

Craig Beitzel, Chincoteague, VA (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:45 PM)

This is just the funniest yet! Hillary's camp claiming to be the underdogs! Is this for real? Obama has been the underdog from the beginning, and even though he is REALLY gaining ground, he will continue to be the underdog until this race is finished. The Clinton name is knows across this country, and every corner of the civilized world. The CLintons have HUGE connections within Washington, and have been pulling out all the stops. Name recognition alone will always be on Hillary's side-even though this may prove to work against her in the end! But look out Hillary!!! As EVERYONE can plainly see, Obama, is being embraced across the country-HE won 13 states, HE won more delegates yesterday. The Clinton spins are including Super delegates in their totals, but these super delegates are not elected delegates awarded yesterday. Obama won yesterday! It's the truth and EVERYONE knows it! Hillary was SAVED by California Even though he clearly won yesterday, he will continue to be the underdog, at least thru the weekend, where i truly believe he will come out with HUGE wins over Hillary, as well as taking in many more superdelegates. Then she can claim DEFEAT, but never that she is the UNDERDOG!!!!

Iowa (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:48 PM)

I understand the dislike many have for the clintons, what i don't get is the excitement over obama, I really don't. His resume to lead this country is even more flimsy than bush's, he is proposing nothing new, dramatic or earth changing as a centerpiece of his campaign, he would have voted against the war is not the same as voting against the war and that argument disqualifies many other dems too, he has sucessfully deflected questions about his early days outside of his own autobiography by sicking his supporters on the questioner, how has he kept jesse jackson and al sharpton's mouth shut and what will it cost this nation?

Al (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:49 PM)

Does Penn honestly think anyone is stupid enough to fall for the Obama is the establishment candidate line.
Somebody, please get this guy a brain.

diane (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:49 PM)

Mr. Barnes - Get your facts straight: Obama leads in exit polls among professionals and the "educated" - irrespective of color and gender. You also imply that the "knowledgeable" voters will come out in the general election...Are these the same idiots that voted for Bush? You call them knowledgeable.

I recognize that is the shills for every candidate are out there and its important to support your candidate. BUT, don't make outright misrepresentations and don't lie. I know that lying is somewhat habitual and a natural reaction for the Clintons, but according your post your last name is Barnes and not Clinton...so try not to embarass yourself by taking on this not so enviable character flaw.

On the topic at hand, Clinton is the establishment candidate if there ever was one. Look at the superdelegate count and the people running her campaign - they are all longtime DNC'ers - McCauliffe et al. Unfortunately, there are people in this country that believe the garbage / spin she is selling.

SQ in NJ (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:51 PM)

What platform can she stand on against McCain? Experience? Hah! John McCain will destroy her in that area. Military? Yeah... keep dreaming. Security? McCain again. Healthcare? Maybe she gets this one. And thats not even bringing up the tons of scandals over the years since they left office. For all those that want to say she stood up to the Republican attack machine... hardly. Bill did definately. Hillary did not. Her major fight with Republicans was on health care... which she lost horribly.
J, OH (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:30 PM)

And Obama is three times as bad so what's your point. Yes saying you were right one time on a political matter he didn't even have to make a choice on just doesn't cut it.

Joyce Patterson (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:32 PM)

Joyce,

Seeing as how the Iraq war is very unpopular for a large majority of the population and Obama opposed it from the start, I'd say Obama is in a stronger position there. Clinton voted for it, remember?

On healthcare, Clinton insists on mandates and even is considering garnishing people's wages to enforce that mandate. How do you think that will go over after the Republican spin? Obama's plan can't be spun the same way since he doesn't have a mandate. Again, Obama's position is stronger.

Then there is that whole thing where people want change. Obama would absolutely DESTROY McCain in this area. Clinton is establishment.

And lastly (and most importantly, I think), conservatives aren't exactly enamored with McCain. This will keep turnout from being too high on the Republican side. Unless he ran against Clinton. Nobody can rally the conservative base like a Clinton. And not only that, most Independents would probably go with McCain. Against Obama, Independents would be split. And that is worst-case-senario. More likely, Obama would win the majority of them. And he might just create some "Obama Republicans". Can you realistically imagine a "Clinton Republican". If you can, I want some of what you are taking.

CitizenJ (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:51 PM)

What happened to the Ted,Maria,caroline and Ophra show in Massachusetts and California.Do you think they are wondering what happened?I sure do

HMT-MI (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:52 PM)

When the GOP says something the guliable young, and the never-will-learns eat it up! The GOP keeps saying they want to run against Hillary? Really? What other truths come out of their mouths? Obama is the weakest Candidate, They have nothing on HRC that hasn't already been disproven over and over and she is stronger than ever! You Obama fools talk about the future but keep bringing up the past! Thats exactly what the GOP wants! Wake up Neophytes, this is not a new game! REAL DEMS don't listen to GOP attack points and use them against another DEM!

Knowsbetter, SF, CA (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:54 PM)

Classic racism and sexism at play right now in Democratic nomination. Republicans (e.g. Bill Bennett and Chuck Todd) want to have Obama to win to knock out Clinton (a woman). Then they will swiftboat his rear end like Kerry in 2004 (even though polls say he is leading) and he will lose the presidency to the Republicans. They want to kill two birds with one stone. That is why WHITE MEN are publicly going to Obama b/c they know the real threat is Clinton with her large women vote which is bigger than men in the U.S. Electorate.

But, Clinton is a fighter and you have to commend her ability to keep pressing on even though the media pundits (yeah you Chuck Todd) are trying to make this rock star (Obama) the front runner in the polls to sway opinion.

I hope you print my opinion. If you don't, the what I am saying above is true.

Interesting (Columbia, MO) (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:55 PM)

When all the smoke clears and the voter gets in the booth, the white male will vote for McCain, the young college kids will not get to the booth and Hillary will have put her foot in her mouth enough time for us thankfully to elect a Republican. We don't need more taxes and socialized medicine and someone who does not have a plan.(obama). Go McCain

Doc/charlotte (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:57 PM)

Maybe a good consideration would be for the Democrats to finally get together and run a Clinton/Obama ticket. This would give us the leadership we need and also give Senator Obama a chance to gain more experience that so many people are having such a challenge with. For now, I'm remaining with my candidate, Senator Obama, but some thought should be given to these two very strong, educated candidates to join forces.

Teri, MA (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:57 PM)

'...superior January fundraising, high-profile endorsements...'

Guess why they want 'DEBATE A WEEK' ?
NO THANKS

The gloves are off
Billary was playing nice in the last debate
She waas enbarrassed about 'race baiting'

She'll revert back to 'bbattle axe' Hillary
They want to smear Obama during a debate

NO DEBATES !
No THANKS !

Sierra, SF (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:58 PM)

Establishment:
4. The existing power structure in society; the dominant groups in society and their customs or institutions; institutional authority.
5. The dominant group in a field of endeavor, organization, etc.
--Per dictionary.com, per definition #4, Obama can never be the establishment this cycle, because no matter how strong he becomes, he will still the upstart in comparison to the established political roots that are the Clintons.
--However, per definition #5, either Clinton or Obama could be the establishment, depending on whom is the frontrunner.
**I have always envisioned definition #4, so have been confused by the MSM and the Clinton campaign. In my mind, the words establishment and frontrunner have always been separate, but that does not--by definition--seem to necessarily be the case.

Does anybody else have any advice on words to classify the candidates that are Hillary and Barack?

i.m.r. (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:58 PM)

Hillary and Bill if elected will renew the fight between the right wing republicans and the democrats. Thus, four more years of a do nothing congress. We do not need Hillary telling us she knows how to fight the republicans. We need Obama with his soft voice and big stick to make things happen! Remember you catch more bees with honey than vinegar.

K. Anderson (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:59 PM)

Superdelegates should not be included. Let's let the people have their say before the politicians screw this thing up. BTW - If you are a superdelegate whose constituents went for a certain candidate, you have no business voting for the other one. This will become an issue if it occurs.

Joe Jacques (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 1:02 PM)

What happen to the 35 years of experience gag? Having 35 years of experience and still the "underdog?" Doesn't paint a pretty picture for the next president of the United States! Yet of course with Billiary as president it would be the "Divided States Of America!"

CC, New York (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 1:06 PM)

if hillary wins, many dems, including myself will vote for Mcain. I am not interested in creating an inherited monarchy here in the U.S. the Clinton's had their time, if Chelsea wants to run then let her go for it when she turns 40. Hillary cannot win independents or republicans, they hate her. Obama has a good showing in the south and in the midwest, states the democrats lose almost every four years in the general election, imagine, a black man winning in the south, change in deed.

Bernard Larsen IV (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 1:07 PM)

GO OBAMA... I think that right now there is an issues with closet racism in our country.. (immigration) (a black president).. People would rather see a waivering woman in office than a stan strong minority.. (even if he's only half)

Jim Wojantoski (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 1:08 PM)

Someone insinuated that Blacks were voting for Barack because he is Black. Well, first off, Barack is half Black and half White. Secondly, I, as a Black woman, am not voting for him because he is Black and White. I am voting for him because he is the most fitted for the office of the Presidency. Today, our nation is in bad standing both at home and in the world. We need someone who possesses the highest skills of diplomacy and leadership to get things accomplished at home and abroad (regaining the respect that the US once had in the world, working hard to rectify the inequities established by the present administration between the most wealthy and the working class our our nation).

Joyce, Sacramento, CA (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 1:08 PM)

John Barnes,Overton,PA
Look at some of the states that Obama won. Kansas, N. Dakota, Colorado, Idaho, Alaska, Utah, Minnesota (by the way, he SMOKED her in these states) ....I wonder what the proportionate ratio of black/white residents is in each of these states? (!)I'm sure you'll agree that we don't usually associate these western states with large groups of African Americans. Point is, yes, he's definitely winning the younger vote (and what's wrong with that-a vote is a vote, right?) as well as the blacks, but he's also appealing to many, many more WHITE people, of all ages. The winner in a general election HAS to bridge a very broad spectrum of voters. It's called ELECTABILITY. FYI, I am a 55 year old white female Democrat. My husband is a 56 year old white Republican....we'll both be voting for Obama in our NC primary (if it gets that far)

Kaye, NC (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 1:08 PM)

John Barnes, Overton, PA, sorry, I guess you haven't been looking at any exit polls. Obama is leading handily across the country in college educated, or post-graduate voters of ALL races. Look it up yourself.

Joel Herring, Kansas City, MO (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 1:09 PM)

"Take out the inexperienced youth votes and the blacks voting along racial lines and you will see who is voting for Obama."

I just wanted to comment on John Barnes. Just because we are young voters doesn't mean we shouldn't be as important as older voters. It also doesn't mean we did not do our homework, and we are the future of the country. Our votes as well as african americans count wheither it be for Obama or Clinton. My vote counts as much as yours and expirence does not mean anything.

Bianca, Franklin, TN (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 1:09 PM)

Fred Cline, Brookfield, WI: '...Obama's greed will be the downfall of the Democratic Party...'

That's right, Fred.... DEMONIZE YOUR OPPOSITION
It's an old Clinton trick
The 'Politics of Personal Destruction'
Did you pay attention to the slams on Ted Kennedy for supporting Obama ?

THAT'S why Bill got impeached !
(besides deserving it)
Build up a partisan environment

Sierra, SF (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 1:09 PM)

Jim Wojantoski (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 1:10 PM)

John Barnes, Overton, PA,
I hope MSNBC will post this. You sir, are sadly mistaken. Go look at the demographics instead of spouting your nonsense. The highest-educated area in the country last night voted for Obama (Silicon Valley and the Bay Area) and he would have won California had it not been for non-college educated Latino and Asian voters in Southern California. I'm a mid-thirties Ivy League-educated white male who would happily compare resumes and intelligence with you and any of the so-called "mature and intelligent" voters who blindly march in lockstep to the Clinton pied-pipers who constantly push your buttons without you even realizing it. Your racist innuendos are right, although not in the way you intended them. It was race in the Latino and Asian communities that was the swing here.

CA Indy (Sent Wednesday, February 06, 2008 1:11 PM)

Next >>

SEND A COMMENT

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

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

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

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

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

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

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=643234