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



Clinton camp: Debate 'game changing'

Posted: Thursday, April 17, 2008 11:43 AM by Domenico Montanaro

From NBC/NJ’s Athena Jones, NBC’s Domenico Montanaro and Andrea Mitchell
Clinton aides held an hour-long conference call Thursday morning to highlight what they described as a winning debate performance last night by the New York senator, calling it a "game-changing" moment because it had raised new questions about Obama for voters and the press to consider.

Communications Director Howard Wolfson called the meetup in Philadelphia last night a "very important and illuminating debate" and said that in it Clinton showed "the strength of her leadership" in foreign policy, getting troops out of Iraq and other issues.

VIDEO: Tim Russert, moderator of "Meet the Press" talks with TODAY's Matt Lauer about the Democratic candidates’ debate in Philadelphia.

Wolfson also framed the debate as one about forthrightness. He said Clinton “gave straight answers” on the tough questions (Bosnia, integrity) and Obama, by contrast, still has some explaining to do (on 1960s radical Bill Ayers and Obama’s stance on gun rights).

“His campaign tried to dodge and weave” when it came to Obama’s answering a questionnaire, in which Obama advocated for a ban on hand guns, Wolfson said. “Last night, he did not give an answer. Sen. Obama needs to be more forthright.”

The campaign also continued to maintain that Clinton never made the “screw ’em” remark about Southern white voters after the 1994 midterm election losses -- as has been claimed by three people present.

Spokesman Phil Singer insisted that Don Baer and Bruce Reed, other participants in the Camp David 1995 meeting, have no recollection of Clinton making the comment and don’t remember this as reflecting the tone of the meeting. Singer went on to say that if you look at the way Sen. Clinton has lived her life and the policies she's pursued, it’s clear she's advocated a progressive agenda aimed at lifting all Americans up.

Benjamin Barber, a noted political scientist and author who was also at the meeting, wrote in his 2001 book that Clinton did say it. As we noted earlier, Barber confirmed to First Read that he heard her make the comment and added that he is a Clinton supporter and donor. FEC data shows Barber donated $1,000 to Clinton’s campaign on Jan. 24.

“We’ve given you our answer on this,” Wolfson said when questioned about Barber’s account. “I do not know the gentleman in question.” Wolfson added that he’s “glad that he’s a supporter” and that he’s not quarreling with Barber’s memory, “but the recollection of other people in room is different.”

The campaign also continued its focus on the significance of the Pennsylvania primary. Singer highlighted Obama’s financial advantages, that he’s spending $3.4 million this week there, an amount Singer called “"earth-shattering, record-breaking, eye-popping, extraordinary.”

“One has to wonder,” Singer said, “if Sen. Obama cannot win under these circumstances, it will affirm, in my view, that … Sen. Clinton is the best candidate to be our standard-bearer going forward.”

Of course, pouring money into the state is not just about the primary. Even if he were to lose the primary, but win the Democratic nomination, those funds could be seen as an investment in the general election.

Some other points:
- Aides were also pressed about Clinton's pledge not to raise taxes on the middle class and her commitment to setting military policy in Iraq -- specifically a policy to begin withdrawing troops within 60 days of her inauguration -- herself and directing the military commanders to carry it out. Aides said the purpose of a campaign was to lay out a candidate's goals and resisted the idea that her answers had boxed her in should she eventually become the nominee or president.

- When challenged on the matter of the two members of Ayers’ Weather Underground group who were pardoned by President Clinton, Wolfson said the two women pardoned were contrite about their past actions whereas Ayers was not and that neither of the women had hosted an event for Clinton at their home, as Ayers had for Obama.

- Aides challenged Obama to agree to a debate in North Carolina -- Clinton has agreed to one, but he has not. Clinton herself has argued Obama only wanted to debate her in states where he was not in the lead.

- When asked whether Clinton's admission that Obama could win in November undermined or contradicted the electability argument she was making to superdelegates, Wolfson said it did not and said that saying somebody can win isn't the same as saying that he will win.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Why did they not ask Hillary about Mark Penn & the Columbian trade deal? Why did they not ask about all the money the Clintons made from Bill promoting the Columbian trade deal? What a farce. Why did they not ask about Peter Paul?
I am glad Obama refused to get in the dirt with a losing candidate. A true party leader; leads in a positive direction and stays focused on the issues for the american people. Mrs. Clinton is not that leader and her tactics will continue to backfire. Obama 08.
Questions that Hilary should have been asked?

(1) Can one accurately say you are implicitly spending Columbia's money while you claim to be against their trade deal since you fie a joint tax with Bill and he took 800K from them?

(2) If you are very serious about this opposition to the deal, why would you not fire your top staff member that collects money for promoting the deal you oppose?

(3) As a follow up to the Bosnia story (the way they kept hounding Barack): Can you call it a mispeak if you repeated the same falsehood three times?
Is Bill's explanation accurate that this happens when one 60 and getting a little forgetful?

(4) Do you believe that Barack is indeed elitist compared to you considering that you also went to Yale and made 110 million last year?
Poor BO is is so  upset...
Contradictions in last night’s debate made by Obama...

1. Saying he wouldn't raise taxes on people making below $250K and then when pushed admitted that he may install a payroll tax that will target those about $97K (THIS TO ME IS THE BIGGEST STORY AND ONE THE REPUBLICANS WILL USE IF HE WERE TO GET THE NOMINATION)
2. Handwriting on the gun questionnaire that he said wasn't his - but has been admitted to at one time was
3. Said he disowned Rev. Wright (although backtracked when he was questioned on that statement by George)
4. Said that we shouldn't overly examine his words (but wait, don't words matter?)
5. Wants positive politics, yet sends talking points to all media trying to insinuate that Clinton is dishonest.
6. When his back is against the wall, always tries to distract by taking a hit at Clinton or McCain (isn't this part of the "typical politics" he has called for an end to?)

---------------------------------------------
The repukes are just iching to send the king of spin to the highest of higher ground!
I was so disappointed by last night's debate.  Instead of focusing on the real issues Americans are facing today, Senator Obama was asked about a FLAG PIN!

What does his wearing/not wearing of a flag pin have to do with his ability to run the country?  Seriously?

I've had it with the pandering.  I've had it with the media patting us on the head and pretending that they know what issues Americans really want to know about.  I've had it with the media feigning shock and moral outrage over non-issues, and treating us like we are all blathering idiots who can't see exactly what they are doing.  What about the economy?  The housing crisis?  The war?

I will still be voting for Obama in the Fall if he is the nominee.  However, if he isn't, I can safely say that I will be done with politics for a long time.  Not because my candidate will have lost the race, but because I don't want any part of politics as they are being played right now.  Politics today have nothing to do with the issues, or what the candidates can really do for this country.  It's about God-damning America, sniper fire in Bosnia, and a 100-year war.  Politics are nothing more than a game of one-upsmanship, and tearing down anyone who gets in the way.

And the media is just as much to blame as the candidates who engage in these types of politics.  Elections are not won by the best candidate, but by the PR firm that can get the media to help them spin non-issues into campaign-crushing issues.  It happened in 2004, and it will happen again this year.  In the end, it will be the candidate that comes up with the best sound bite, and is better at spinning his/her opponent's words and making them stick, that wins.  It won't matter what that candidate actually believes in – just what they (and the media) made the American public believe their opponent believes in.

Bitter?  I'm not just bitter.  I'm bitter, I'm angry, and I'm done with this game!
Darren, you're a looney as a bird.
McCain will beat Obama in a landslide.
Hillary is the only hope we Democrats have!
If you look at the adjectives used to describe Hillary Clinton, you can better understand why the whole country wants Barack Obama to represent us as President.  Having George Stephanopoulos, a person with strong ties to Hillary, be a moderator was a big mistake and fooled nobody.  We voters don't like to see candidates throw their political clout around.  We still believe in the American dream and that you don't have to be a hard-core politician to be president.  Quite frankly, we want CHANGE from the nastiness of old politics, and Barack Obama is the only candidate well-equipped to do that.  Anyone who watched last night's debacle knows that now.
THIS JUST iN.  Obama now leads in supedelegates, too.  Quite the game changer, huh, Howie?!   Three yesterday for him and now two today ( but it's early.)
On what planet are the Clintons on that they actually believe that voters or supers are going to sway towards them because they throw a better sucker punch.  Give me a break.  Its over Hillary.  At this point she truly is just ruining our chances for Obama to win against McCain.  I'm so frustrated.  Debate the issues and then let the voters decide.  Both Hillary and Obama would do a great job but look at how Hillary is campaigning and how Obama is campaigning.  Clinton admitted last night that she is a LIAR.. She admitted it and asked us to "look over" it.  No thanks Hillary.  I don't want a liar for a president.  I choose Barack Obama!

So tired of the media and Clinton focus on nonissues.  I agree with Obama.  Let's hear them discuss real issues.  I was sickened by so much time in debate wasted on drama.  I don't know why pundits think Obama looked weak.  This process is weak!  I say no more debates if it's the same rehash of nonissues.
Game changing is right. I am no longer a Democrat, an ABC This Week viewer or a proud American after last night's debate. I couldn't believe Gibson asked Obama if he was more patriotic than Rev. Wright. So stupid. I am ashamed of Hillary, ashamed of the media, ashamed of my country.
Any journalist who asks Mr. Obama a question that he doesn't have a good canned answer for should be thrown out of journalism.  How dare them!  Why should he have to talk about his mistakes?  Surely everyone can see is greatness.
The game change in this debate was that the mass media revealed its inanity and bias.  The questions did little to further the debate between the two candidates, and did seem skewed against the frontrunner, but beyond that, they were silly.  Flag pins?  I mean really, flag pins?  Are we living in the McCarthy era?  It's beyond offensive to ask if Rev. Wright "loves his country" -- how is that a qualification for president?  The whole "debate" seemed aimed at getting the candidates to all out brawl with one another on stage, the kind of reality television moment that the networks would love.  This debate did not serve either candidate well.  I'm horrified that this is how low we have sunk as a country -- we are already the laughingstock of the global world, and this debate just confirms it.  I don't know why I expected better than the right wing frames the moderators used: was FoxNews behind this? Gibson and Stephanopolous are a disgrace to their profession.
Well I did kinda feel sorry for Obama last night.  He at times looked like a deer in the headlights, he was flabbergasted at the audacity of the questions he was asked!  He was so annoyed and was trying so hard not to wave his finger in disgust at the moderator.  It is a good thing they had commercial breaks so he could cool down.
He is not ready to join the grownup as a president, he does seem as arrogant as bush.
I thought Wright was game changing?  No wait, it was 'bitter'.  Oh wait, it is the debate.  Anyone seeing a pattern.  
The game has definitely changed.  Win or lose in PA, the Clinton campaign is to be congratulated.  In a few short months, Wolfson, Penn and  all have managed to deliver negative ratings for Hillary that rival those of W and Cheney.  Bravo!
Here are the issues:
1) Hillary voted for this war and was late to realize that it was a blunder.  She ceded Congressional war making powers to the president and then again supported him in the Lieberman/Kyl amendment (after she claimed that GWB had misused her trust in 2002 with the Iraqi war resolution).
2) Hillary is corrupted by ties to special interests
3) Hillary has no real positions other than those dictated by political expediency.
4) Hillary continues campaigning with the politics of political destruction.
5) Hillary has run a terrible campaign both in style and fiscal management.
6) Hillary surrounds herself with people of dubious character traits.
7) Hillary campaigned for NAFTA and her husband and former chief strategist (still with the campaign) support a trade agreement with Colombia which she claims to be against and which benefits corporations over working people.

You pundits are so behind the curve.  You watch these debates with the idea that whoever gets in the most hits has the best performance.  The public views Obama more the victor of last night's debate and Hillary's smarminess continues to wax as her paramount personality trait.  The woman will say anything to get elected and the public is on to her.  I can't believe how George and Charles didn't nail her for her admission of lying about Bosnia.  She lied!...out and out lied!  She's done it before and she'll do it again.  This is not the stuff we want our president to be made of.

Obama is trying to change the tone of the campaign.  What you guys see as defference is actually self-restraint.  The public gets it; you don't.
Obama '08
Here's what is really interesting - Online voting shows Obama won the debate by 53% and Clinton only 29%.  So why are the news media saying it was a bad debate for Obama and not Clinton - when over 74,000 people voting the opposite??  Also this debate was not shown on TV in East Bay CA?  Why is that??
There is no winners. The ones to win by debates, is the public, to help to find out about the issuses. This debate did not do this.  As for Wolfson in his believes to say, someone can win isn't that he will will win, was that another lie?
Conclusion is that Clinton is now campaigning for 2012.  And she needs to have Obama down by November and that's why she's going very negative.
Hillary  is the embodiment  of all we hate about political office seekers.  Are their any great and noble men and woman who want to serve their country rather that seek their own personal fame  by any way they think will work?  Do we not develop greatness anymore?
Bill & Hillary Clinton?  Who????????  I vaguely remember them, weren't they liars?
"The sting of rebuke is the truth." B. Franklin
Obama has to face the truth. He can't hide out anymore. He can't avoid questions. He has to answer why he exercised such poor judgement in his associations? Do guess Wm Ayers has to join Grandma and Irreverent Wright under the bus, though. Ayers holds a fundraising for Obama at his home just down the street from Obama, but now Barry wants you to believe he never knew the guy!  
I don't get it.  If we made this campaign all about record and the changes that would be made in Washington and not about the past and associations of the candidates then wouldn't Hillary Clinton be the nominee?  I think it would be great to base a candidates ability to be President on their record and experience, but we all know thats not how it works!  Obama should be glad thats not how it works!  Obama not only lies about who he has associated himself with, but his whole campaign is one big lie.  He continues to say he will work with both sides to get things done and that he didn't vote for the war so he has better judgment...WELL... Hillary already does work with the republicans in the senate.  She works and passes legislation with people that made her life a living hell...people that once said Hillary Clinton should be struck by lightening.  I don't believe Barack Obama has ever passed legislation with someone that wishes he was struck by lightening.  Why doesn't the media talk about this...OH WAIT ITS BECAUSE ITS NOT ABOUT RECORD AND EXPERIECE IT IS ABOUT PAST RELATIONSHIPS AND ASSOCIATIONS.  IF OBAMA CANT DEAL WITH 45 MINUTES OF THIS THEN HE IS SCREWED IN THE GENERAL AND IF HE BECOMES PRESIDENT.  HILLARY HAS GONE THROUGH THIS FOR 17 YEARS and DURING THIS CAMPAIGN FOR 15 MONTHS FROM THE MEDIA!  THEY SAY SHE WAS PICKED ON MORE BECAUSE SHE WAS THE FRONT RUNNER...WELL GUESS WHAT BARACK OBAMA IS THE FRONT RUNNER SO SUCK IT UP!!!!  Oh yah and Barack Obama wasn't in the senate to vote!  This guy that can't deal with 45 minutes of criticism without people crying is the same guy that wants to meet with horrible world leaders without and preconditions!  SPARE ME!!
are you kidding????? Since when is "....I knew the statement (Bosnia) didn't match the real situation" a mispeak. Mispeak is nothing more than a political euphemism for " I lied".....no wonder the majority of Americans view her as dishonest.Great virtue for a sel-proclaimed commander-in-chief.
Hillary won the debate???  What debate?  This was an attempt at an execution of Obama's character and the executioners Charlie and George wore the black hoods while the cold and smug Hillary looked on.

Obama apologized for "mangling" his "bitter" message.  Everyone knows what he was trying to say and what he said is true.  I am bitter and frustrated with my government and I want change!!

Hillary didn't misspeak. . SHE LIED!!  She stood up there in front of a crowd 3? times and lied about Bosnia and now wants us to believe that she misspoke??  

Obama gave the right answer on Iran should they attack Israel. . "take appropriate mesures" which is in line with his believing the Iraq war was illconceived and stupid. Hillary showed herself to be the true War Hawk she is with her umbrella and massive attack response (I can't recall her exact words.)


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=910262

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