By Big Tent Democrat

Kevin Drum and Matt Yglesias get it. Kevin writes:

Why is it somehow OK for John McCain to run on the basis of being the guy who can protect America while Hillary shouldn't? Why are we often so eager to practically concede to Republicans exactly the stereotypes they want voters to believe about us? Seems to me that Democrats ought to get used to the idea of competing on this dimension regardless of whether ads like this are precisely the right way to do it.

The funny thing is Obama did not shy away or shriek in fear of this ad. He responded forcefully. All the fearful shrieking came from some Left blogs. Pretty funny really.

Paul Lukasiak continues his number crunching analysis at Corrente Wire today, and concludes,

Based on available exit polling from states that held primary elections, while Obama dominates the “Independent” voter, Hillary Clinton actually does slightly better among “Moderate” voters— and this is even more true in crucial swing states. The data suggests that a more comprehensive review of all such “electability” factors is required.

Paul's prior analysis on the vote is detailed here and explained here.

From a New Yorker interview, Testing the Waters with Barack Obama, November, 2006.

Where do you find yourself having the biggest differences with Hillary Clinton, politically?

You know, I think very highly of Hillary. The more I get to know her, the more I admire her. I think she’s the most disciplined—one of the most disciplined people—I’ve ever met. She’s one of the toughest. She’s got an extraordinary intelligence. And she is, she’s somebody who’s in this stuff for the right reasons. She’s passionate about moving the country forward on issues like health care and children. So it’s not clear to me what differences we’ve had since I’ve been in the Senate. I think what people might point to is our different assessments of the war in Iraq, although I’m always careful to say that I was not in the Senate, so perhaps the reason I thought it was such a bad idea was that I didn’t have the benefit of U.S. intelligence. And, for those who did, it might have led to a different set of choices. So that might be something that sort of is obvious. But, again, we were in different circumstances at that time: I was running for the U.S. Senate, she had to take a vote, and casting votes is always a difficult test.

That was before Barack Obama decided to vote for President. Which Obama do we believe now? [Hat tip to commenter Pavaoh}.

A newly released Fox News Ohio poll (pdf) of likely Democratic voters in Ohio has Hillary ahead of Barack Obama 46% to 38%. The margin of error is + or - 4%.

CNN takes a look at the "poll of polls" in both Ohio and Texas.

Two "poll of polls" calculated by CNN show competitive races in both Texas and Ohio. The Texas "poll of polls" of likely primary voters shows Obama at 48 percent, Clinton at 44 percent, and 8 percent unsure. In Ohio, Clinton has 47 percent, Obama has 40 percent, and 13 percent are unsure.

The "poll of polls" includes: [More...]

By Big Tent Democrat

I sometimes wonder if I am watching the same election as some people. While it seems clear that the main function of the Left blogs these days is to make fun of the Clinton campaign, I expect some people to have a better sense of the Clinton argument. Some one like Marc Ambinder. But this tells me he is not straying from the Left blog role:

Hillary Clinton will be on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart Monday, March 3, at 11PM ET. Here's the press release.

And check out her new ad on national security that began airing in Texas today. Big Tent Democrat wrote it up earlier but comments came in so fast, the thread had to close early. Here's a place to continue the discussion.

The ad says:

It’s 3am and your children are safe and asleep

But there’s a phone in the White House and it’s ringing. Something’s happening in the world

Your vote will decide who answers that call.

Whether it’s someone who already knows the world’s leaders, knows the military - someone tested and ready to lead in a dangerous world.

It’s 3am and your children are safe and asleep. Who do you want answering the phone?

By Big Tent Democrat

So Jay Rockefeller endorsed Obama.

Good for Obama. But my real question is so will Rockefeller follow Obama's judgment on telecom immunity? How about Iraq funding and withdrawal? Think Obama can lead him on THOSE ISSUES? Please?

mcjoan has a good post on it.

By Big Tent Democrat

The Left blogs are in an uproar over this ad:

Not sure what offends in it. It raises a critical question for the Presidency. I think Obama has handled the ads better than the Left blogs: [More...]

By Big Tent Democrat

Polls are all over the place in both Texas and Ohio and polling is NEVER an exact science. But I think extra caution is in order for Texas and Ohio. Why? Because of the demographic split. After Obama's sweeping win in Wisconsin, where he truly eroded Clinton base for the first time, we seem to have settled back into the old breakdowns - Clinton winning whites, women, Latinos, seniors and lower earning voters. Obama winning African Americans overwhelmingly, young voters, men and upper income voters. The margins appears fairly static.

This means the key issue now is who comes out to vote and in what numbers. Each pollster's turnout model will dictate their results. Since predicting who will turnout - the likely voter screen - is always the most difficult part of polling, I think it is fair to say we, and THEY, are all guessing.

At this point, no result will surprise me.

ABC News reports on the implications of Tony Rezko's trial for Barack Obama.

I think one line Obama may wish he never said when defending his toughness is,

"I come from Chicago politics. We're accustomed to rough and tumble," he said.

Chicago politics is well-known for being dirty. Perhaps he should have talked about his experience staying above the fray of it rather than implying he knew how to get into the fight.

By Big Tent Democrat

Matt Yglesias, quoting a Clinton campaign memo, misunderstands this point:

The Obama campaign and its allies are outspending us two to one in paid media and have sent more staff into the March 4 states. . . . If he cannot win all of these states with all this effort, there's a problem.

Matt seems to think the Clinton campaign is alluding to a nomination problem. No, the reference is to the general election. I think it is clear that if Obama wins Ohio OR Texas, he will be the nominee. But if he fails to win both, the Clinton campaign is raising legitimate questions about what this means in a general election, especially in Ohio. I know the Left blogs get their jollies from ridiculing Hillary Clinton and her campaign, but sometimes they DO raise a legitimate issue. It might be nice to think about this one.

NOTE - Comments are closed.

Via Sentencing Law and Policy, Hillary was interviewed by Vibe Magazine last weekend.

VIBE: In your speech, you talked about having first, second, and third chances for children. In the last ten years the rate of incarceration of women has increased exponentially. I don’t think the average person realizes that it’s not 50% or 100%, it’s like 750% in the last thirty years. There are a disproportionate number of African-American men and women who are going to be released from prison with felony convictions. What do we do about that group of people who are effectively disenfranchised when they come out?

CLINTON: Number one, we need to divert more people from the prison system. We have too many people in prison for non-violent drug offenses, which disproportionately impacts on the African-American community. That’s why I’ve been a strong advocate of eliminating the disparity between crack cocaine and powder cocaine [sentencing].

There may have been a reason for it 25 years ago but there isn’t any justification for it now. But it also means that in the prisons themselves, we’ve got to get back to the services that used to be there.

More...