home

Clinton Media Conference Call - Setting Expectations

This morning's Clinton conference call is all about setting expectations.

Clinton says a month ago, the RCP average for Indiana Obama led by 7 points. "That is his baseline" argues Geoff Garin. Clinton will do better than that. In North Carolina, In North Carolina, RCP average Obama led by close to 20 points. Clinton will do better than that.

Wolfson discusses the Obama memo, which predicts victories for Obama of 7 points in Indiana and 8 points in North Carolina. Wolfson discusses Joe Andrews' flat prediction that Obama will win Indiana and North Carolina.

Wolfson seems pretty confident about Indiana. More . . .

Phil Singer discusses a WSJ article that he says states that Obama won the Teamsters endorsement by promising to lift the federal consent decree on the Teamsters that currently regulate that union. ON ABC this morning, Obama denied making such a commitment, contradicting the story.

Q. New ad does not discuss gas tax. What does that mean? Wolfson, it is one ad. We will discuss it continually.

Asked about the "secret nuclear" Clinton plan to seat Florida and Michigan, Wolfson said clinton has been fighting for seating Florida and Michigan continually and publically for some time so if this is a secret plan, it was the worst kept secret in the world.

Asked about Clinton's remarks on what would happen if Iran nuked Israel, comments that the questioner stated Obama called irresponsible electioneering. Garin says it was a response to a particular question. Clinton believes it would be dangerous to leave the possibility of any confusion on what the consequences would be if Iran nuked Israel.

I asked about the Magic Number, if the Clinton camp accepts 2025 as the Magic Number or do they insist that it be 2209. I asked specifically if Obama garnered 2209 delegates, would they accept that he had won the nomination. At first Garin seemed to accept this argument but then other speakers for Clinton seemed to NOT accept it, calling the issue "academic." I strenuously disagree that it is academic and I am at a loss to understand why the Clinton campaign would not at this time accept 2209 as the Magic Number.

If Obama gets 2209 delegates, it would be irresponsible and harmful for the Clinton campaign not to accept Obama as the nominee.

By Big Tent Democrat, Speaking for me only.

< A Serious Charge | The Magic Number >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Axelrod (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:12:13 AM EST
    was on Joe this morning.  he would only say they would "do very well" on tuesday.
    no mention of winning anything.

    I wonder what the campaign's defintion of (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:14:23 AM EST
    doing very well is?

    Parent
    Losing IN By 15 and NC By 10 !!! (none / 0) (#46)
    by PssttCmere08 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:43:18 AM EST
    Diebold hires Andrews for 50-state strategy (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by Josey on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:13:32 AM EST
    LOL

    Oakland Tribune, Aug 2005 -  http://tinyurl.com/4d8vbd

    >>>With a phone call and a retainer, Diebold CEO Walden O'Dell has launched former Democratic National Committee chairman Joe Andrew on a 50-state ambassadorship for electronic voting.

    Parent

    oh my! (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by karen for Clinton on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:25:27 AM EST
    This is GREAT news for Clinton in public image.

    And proves he'd sell his soul.

    Gotta get over to Bradblog and see how he takes the big news.

    Check out the Diebold story from months ago, maybe December or so, NYTimes Sunday Magazine, 10 or so pages long.  It is really bad news.

    Parent

    They'll win NC (none / 0) (#16)
    by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:16:55 AM EST
    something tells me (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:18:18 AM EST
    they are not as certain as you.

    Parent
    Not publicly (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:19:43 AM EST
    It's called expectations management.

    Parent
    Joe Andrew is still under the influence (5.00 / 0) (#35)
    by ruffian on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:34:26 AM EST
    of the magnum of Kool-aid he downed last week. Predicts 2 Obama wins.  Axelrod needs to have a talk with him.

    Parent
    I can't imagine that was authorized (none / 0) (#38)
    by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:36:33 AM EST
    I'm sure not (5.00 / 2) (#56)
    by ruffian on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:55:52 AM EST
    If it weren't for the numbers game, I'd almost enjoy watching newly minted Obama SDs.  Soemtimes they are pretty amusing.  So excited with their newfound stage and the applause of the Obama masses. They say the darndest things. Then they quickly get ushered off the stage by cooler heads. Andrew's 15 minutes are about up.

    Parent
    15 minutes of fame (none / 0) (#40)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:39:14 AM EST
    can do strange and ugly things.

    Parent
    So Far, Joe Has Appeared Strange and His (none / 0) (#47)
    by PssttCmere08 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:44:28 AM EST
    spew ugly.  Who is he again?

    Parent
    nobody (5.00 / 0) (#65)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:10:47 AM EST
    I forgot (none / 0) (#64)
    by waldenpond on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:10:34 AM EST
    IF you were serious... I forgot.  I would have to use the search to remind myself.  Kind of funny.

    Parent
    gambling man! (none / 0) (#21)
    by diplomatic on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:19:43 AM EST
    out on a real limb there, lol.

    Parent
    actually Im the gambler (none / 0) (#25)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:22:19 AM EST
    Im the one who has to give Dean and Donna 20 bucks if Hillary loses this thing.
    that is going to hurt more than losing.

    Parent
    curious (5.00 / 0) (#69)
    by karen for Clinton on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:19:29 AM EST
    What do they owe you if she wins?

    I hope their end of the bargain is they promise to STFU already. :-0

    Parent

    andgarden, (none / 0) (#37)
    by Lil on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:35:34 AM EST
    Are you predicting this or just saying that is what Axelrod is saying?

    Parent
    I'm predicting (none / 0) (#39)
    by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:37:13 AM EST
    though it's probably also what Axelrod is thinking.

    Parent
    Is tis a change for you (none / 0) (#41)
    by Lil on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:39:33 AM EST
    I thought you were one of the commenters who though there was no way she could win NC? I can't always keep it straight who says what anymore.

    Parent
    I mixed it all up, forget it! (none / 0) (#43)
    by Lil on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:40:56 AM EST
    Yes, I think Obama will win NC (none / 0) (#44)
    by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:40:56 AM EST
    which is not a change from saying that Clinton cannot.

    Parent
    Obama Pander? (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by white n az on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:14:31 AM EST
    say it ain't so Joe...

    Howie Kurtz - WaPo says "Once Cordial Press Turns Chilly"

    What happened to BTD's 'media darling' ?

    They just remembered (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by ruffian on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:16:19 AM EST
    they don't like Democrats.  It was only a matter of time.

    Parent
    He probably didn't help himself by.... (5.00 / 3) (#29)
    by Maria Garcia on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:25:25 AM EST
    ...calling Matt Lauer "Tim" this morning at least twice that I heard.

    Parent
    yeah (none / 0) (#17)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:17:10 AM EST
    good think O barely qualifies.

    Parent
    BTD's media darling theory (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by diplomatic on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:22:02 AM EST
    I look forward to never being able to prove him wrong and would instead prefer we never get to find out.  Come on Hillary, save BTD from his theories... pull out this nomination and the media will never turn on Obama!

    Parent
    he still has plenty (none / 0) (#13)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:15:57 AM EST
    of wingmen.  and women.

    Parent
    Rev Wright happened to him (none / 0) (#18)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:17:15 AM EST
    No more soaring in the media clouds, we have a stall.

    Parent
    speaking of soaring (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:20:20 AM EST
    in the clouds

    Hillary looks good in black. no?

    Parent

    Hillary to Obama: I am your father! (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by diplomatic on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:23:39 AM EST
    What the? (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:42:18 AM EST
    I can't believe you seduced me into clicking on that, some of it is pretty funny though.  Hillary giving Dean the darkside death grip....I just busted out laughing.

    Parent
    Someone got the memo (none / 0) (#26)
    by cawaltz on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:23:36 AM EST
    That the strategy for McCain was to keep the Democratic electorate divided. Sorry Obama, the press will have to throw you under the bus. You can join Dodd, Edwards, Kuchinich, Richardson and the rest of the Presidential Survivor contestants. Don't worry, Senator Cliton will be joining you shortly.

    When will folks learn, the media is NOT on our side They are in favor of deregulation and all the goodies that a GOP majority promises.

    Parent

    The article got everything right excpet (none / 0) (#28)
    by tigercourse on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:24:37 AM EST
    it left out the historical precedent. The media always, always turns against the Democrat at some point. They built up Obama and are going to have a grand time knocking him down.

    Parent
    which (none / 0) (#31)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:26:11 AM EST
    as any long term observer knows, is always more fun than building him up.


    Parent
    I wonder when (none / 0) (#33)
    by cawaltz on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:29:08 AM EST
    they will start pointing out he took a gasp vacation and when the footage of him in a bathing suit on the beach while the country is in a recession narrative comes out.

    Parent
    comment found at IndyStar (5.00 / 3) (#34)
    by Josey on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:31:01 AM EST
    >>>>Obama followers remind me of the actors from the movie, "Night of the Living Dead", where the "undead" wander through the graveyard with uncomprehending stares, arms outstretched. They chant in monotone unison:

    O-o-ob-b-a-a-a-am-m-m-a-a-a...O-o-ob-b-a-a-a-am-m-m-a-a-a...O-o-ob-b-a-a-a-am-m-m-a-a-a.....

    It's quite a sight to see the Svengali Effect of a messianiac character as these Pied Pipers (such as Obama) occur with blessed infrequency. It is a little humorous that the fictional Pied Piper's target audience was children because the present day one mirrors the same strategy on college campuses with the dependents who are still getting their support from "evil Republicans", i.e., their parents.


    thanks (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:35:21 AM EST
    that was good.

    Parent
    Love It....The Undead In That Flick Are Nicer (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by PssttCmere08 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:48:15 AM EST
    than some of the obamaphiles I have run across on the blogs.  They, too, will eat your heart without a thought.

    Parent
    The Teamster thing (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by angie on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:40:45 AM EST
    I would like to see BTD's take on this -- will it have legs? it seems like a pretty serious charge and it is being reported in the WSJ not the National Enquirer.  Also, as to Obama's denial about it -- big surprise -- that seems to be a pattern from him -- deny anything "bad" ever happened -- Rezko, NAFTA talks, Wright, etc.

    I'm confused (none / 0) (#51)
    by cmugirl on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:46:44 AM EST
    what about the Teamsters?  What did I miss?

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#57)
    by Steve M on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:59:26 AM EST
    Link here.

    It's not clear to me what Obama is denying.  The article is pretty openly sourced to named individuals from both the Teamsters and the Obama campaign.

    Obama seems to be good at persuading people he will do what they want him to, without actually promising, like the time he told that Florida fundraiser that he would "do the right thing" regarding Florida's delegates.  It's a good talent for a politician to have.

    The President, by the way, does not have the power to lift a consent decree unilaterally, which I'm sure the Teamsters know.  It's a judicially enforced settlement, meaning it can only be dissolved by its terms or with the agreement of the court.

    Parent

    I stand corrected about the WSJ (none / 0) (#61)
    by angie on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:01:07 AM EST
    being subscription only -- thanks for doing what I couldn't do (ie, link properly). :-)  


    Parent
    also, wish I could edit (none / 0) (#67)
    by angie on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:15:29 AM EST
    I wrote "serious charge" because I had also read BTD's other post with that title, but I didn't mean to imply that Obama had done anything illegal -- I should have written "serious story" because of the back room deal aspect to it & how it is another example of Obama promising different things to different people. I also find if very odd that he is denying it now. IMO, something is fishy here but not necessarily illegal. Sorry for any confusion.

    Parent
    See, it deserves more attention (none / 0) (#58)
    by angie on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:59:53 AM EST
    It is kind of in the middle of BTD's post -- if I knew how to link here, WSJ is subscription only, I think, but from MSNBC (sorry only place I could find it):
    "The Wall Street Journal reports that Obama may have offered the Teamsters a quid pro quo in order to win the endorsement. "Obama won the endorsement of the Teamsters earlier this year after privately telling the union he supported ending the strict federal oversight imposed to root out corruption, according to officials from the union and the Obama campaign. It's an unusual stance for a presidential candidate. Policy makers have largely treated monitoring of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters as a legal matter left to the Justice Department since an independent review board was set up in 1992 to eliminate mob influence in the union."

    Parent
    Washington Post: Chelsea Article (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by Stellaaa on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:55:42 AM EST
    CDS now has crossed into the next generation of Clintons.  I thought for sure, no one had anything mean to say about Chelsea, but lo and behold, they found someone to find fault with Chelsea.  

    Chelsea has been winning kudos in this campaign as an effective surrogate for Hillary Rodham Clinton, but I keep wondering whether she's an effective representative for us. Like me, Chelsea's a twentysomething (28 to my 29), a member of the generation that, as it happens, I spend a lot of time learning and writing about. We're ironic, sarcastic and self-deprecating, a reflection of the pop culture and politics that played out while we grew up in the 1980s, 1990s and onward.

    So, not fitting the template of your generation now is a sin.  


    Maybe she's a little more mature... (none / 0) (#59)
    by cmugirl on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:00:28 AM EST
    ...than other 20-somethings?

    Parent
    Strange piece (none / 0) (#62)
    by Steve M on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:02:02 AM EST
    It's supposed to be controversial that Chelsea is proud of her mom?  Whatever.

    Parent
    If she isn't sarcastic (none / 0) (#74)
    by cawaltz on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:51:55 AM EST
    then I say good for her. Since when is being reproachful or cutting something down considered a "good" trait? I don't consider it a boon. Furthermore, why does every generation think they are the first generation to invent sarcasm or irony? It's just usually with time you learn to bite your trongue and temper what you say. You learn the old adage your parents taught you about catching more flies with honey than vinegar actually MAY have some truth to it.

    Parent
    Her Mother Reportedly Is Very Sarcastic (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by BDB on Mon May 05, 2008 at 01:51:33 PM EST
    In private and we've seen it a little bit in public, especially when she mocked the Unity Schtick.

    Sarcasm, however, is very dangerous in politics because if people take sarcastic comments seriously they can be damaging (there is no sarcasm font in newspapers).  I think it's sad that people think that Chelsea Clinton is exactly and only as she appears on the campaign trail.  When, in reality, all of us are to some extent different at work than we are amongst friends.

    But then overall, the entire piece is idiotic.  One of the great things that comes with aging is that I no longer read generational pieces as though they have some sort of wisdom to impart (like I did in my early 20s).  Instead, I see them for the crap they are.

    I predict when the author of the piece is 39 and not 29, she will look back on it and cringe.

    Parent

    Chelsea '16? '20? (none / 0) (#73)
    by misspeach2008 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:41:14 AM EST
    Shapira: Waah, I'm the voice of my generation (none / 0) (#75)
    by Ellie on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:04:19 AM EST
    I keep wondering whether [Chelsea's] an effective representative ... of the generation that, as it happens, I spend a lot of time learning and writing about. (WaPo, Shapira, May 04, 2008)

    Awww, and it sounds like WaPo spokestwit Ian Shapira studied and, like, everything.

    As evidence underscoring Shapira's insight, WaPo accompanies it with a photo of a sombre Chelsea Clinton wearing a black dress at Our Lady Of Providence In Puerto Rico. Tsk, she couldn't find some wacky rave gear to wear instead, or maybe borrow comedic material from Rev. "After 10am Service I do Blue" Wright?

    I don't know where Shapira's irony and self-deprecation went off the rails but he makes up for it in unintentional hilarity.

    Parent

    i'm chelsea's age, and that (none / 0) (#79)
    by kangeroo on Mon May 05, 2008 at 12:45:52 PM EST
    writer doesn't speak for me.  i'd say our generation is more like "ironic, sarcastic, and narcissistic."  too preoccupied with snark and pop-culture and self-absorption generally to give a sh*t about important things going on in the world outside their bubble.  but then again, that's a broad generalization; there are certainly exceptions.  like chelsea.  :)

    Parent
    Last SUSA (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by AnninCA on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:17:47 AM EST
    poll on Indiana shows Hillary in good shape.  

    http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=777e9395-9b22-44ec-a525-981fcb9029e9                                  

    Thanks (none / 0) (#70)
    by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:23:26 AM EST
    Where did you find the link? Did you see NC up too?

    Parent
    On another blog (none / 0) (#72)
    by AnninCA on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:26:19 AM EST
    is where this SUSA poll came up.  I haven't found NC yet.  

    woohoo!

    Parent

    So Obama picks up more delegates than Hillary (none / 0) (#1)
    by riddlerandy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:02:55 AM EST
    on Tuesday, and it's a win for Hillary?  Sounds like the election version of voodoo economics.  Hillary can't afford any more "wins" like that.

    I would suppose... (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by white n az on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:10:00 AM EST
    that it's easier to count the chickens before they hatch when they've come home to roost.

    Parent
    just (none / 0) (#5)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:10:28 AM EST
    make sure your ducks are in a row

    Parent
    Is this the written version. . . (none / 0) (#8)
    by LarryInNYC on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:12:16 AM EST
    of flipping the commenter the bird?  Or am I on a wild goose chase?

    Parent
    Well (5.00 / 3) (#6)
    by cawaltz on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:11:29 AM EST
    at this point everyone KNOWS that Obama has a sizable delegate lead. What everybody is watching is to see if Obama can get to the magic number o seal the deal. If Clinton prevents him from geting the magic number she can consider it a "win" because it means she can continue the contest until the next primaries and she still has a shot(albeit a smaller one than Obama)at winning the nominaton.

    The bottom line is the smaller the margins of win, the bigger the margins of doubt that superdelegates might have on his ability to carry off the GE.

    I don't see this any different than the Obama supporters who were claiming his 9+ deficit in Penn was a win because he was behind by twenty. It's spin. Unfortunately, in an American Idol culture, "spin" does carry weight.

    Parent

    geting the magic number (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:13:29 AM EST
    that magic number will only be reached with supers.
    by either candidate.

    Parent
    which is why the margins matter (none / 0) (#20)
    by cawaltz on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:18:59 AM EST
    If you exceed expectations then you can claim it as a "win"(Look I overperformed in my perceived "weak" spot.). I'm glad I'm not a superdelegate. The candidates have two entirely different strategies(and demographic strongholds) for winning and the electorate seems split on which strategy is better.

    Parent
    Let's see them spin... (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by white n az on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:16:31 AM EST
    30% white voter support in NC... a 2:1 loss to Clinton after Tuesday's vote.

    Parent
    Obama seems confident (none / 0) (#48)
    by Josey on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:45:03 AM EST
    >>>On NBC's "Today" show, Obama predicted that after the final contests June 3 in Montana and South Dakota, "We will be in a position to make a decision who the Democratic nominee is going to be," he said. "I will be the Democratic nominee."

    Parent
    He Only Appears Confident When In Friendly (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by PssttCmere08 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:54:01 AM EST
    territory or is scripted, so I wouldn't put much stock in that comment.  He loves making comments that aren't true and then taking them back.  :)

    Parent
    True (none / 0) (#77)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon May 05, 2008 at 12:12:58 PM EST
    If he said that Indiana was going to be close but all the polls say differently then we know he lies about this stuff.

    Parent
    Obama seems confident (none / 0) (#49)
    by Josey on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:45:03 AM EST
    >>>On NBC's "Today" show, Obama predicted that after the final contests June 3 in Montana and South Dakota, "We will be in a position to make a decision who the Democratic nominee is going to be," he said. "I will be the Democratic nominee."

    Parent
    You drove from the future just to tell us that? (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by Ellie on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:25:33 AM EST
    Well I'll give you this much: traveling backwards in time is one way to save on gas.

    Parent
    They'll both come out with about the same # (none / 0) (#2)
    by Exeter on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:06:21 AM EST
    of delegates -- super delegates and a case to push for Florida and Michigan are the name of the game now.

    Parent
    I was happy to see Hillary (none / 0) (#3)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:09:29 AM EST
    talk about FL and MI sunday. (in the park with George).

    Parent
    Interesting NY Times Take (5.00 / 4) (#32)
    by felizarte on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:26:34 AM EST
    Clinton Steals One Show, While Obama Endures Another

    By ALESSANDRA STANLEY
    Senator Barack Obama sat hunched on Sunday across the desk from Tim Russert on "Meet The Press" on NBC and wearily endured question after question about his relationship with the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr.

    Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton stood up from her armchair on Sunday to tower over George Stephanopoulos on "This Week" on ABC and merrily took on all critics, even the king of the Clinton-bashers, the talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh.

    "He's always had a crush on me," Mrs. Clinton said with a sly smile.

    Talk shows, even the more serious news programs, are never really about talk; they are about image and demeanor. Together, "Meet the Press" and its rival "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" provided an arresting tableau of the reversal of fortunes in the Democratic race. Mrs. Clinton was forceful, confident and at times even frisky as she easily deflected questions from Mr. Stephanopoulos and members of a town-hall-style meeting in Indianapolis. Mr. Obama, usually the one to see the humor in politics, instead looked grave and dispirited.

    The anchors, on the other hand, did not reverse roles: as usual, Mr. Russert came out ahead in that Sunday talk-show contest. Mrs. Clinton gave ABC a more vivid and dynamic show, but it came at Mr. Stephanopoulos's expense. Mrs. Clinton seemed to relish the opportunity to undercut him, a former adviser to her husband, with needling jokes and alpha-candidate body blocks.

    When Mr. Stephanopoulos asked her about an ABC survey suggesting that 6 of 10 people thought she was dishonest, she was on her feet and he was still seated, and she dismissed the notion while staring down the ABC anchor like a school principal quelling an impertinent eighth grader.

    Mr. Russert never ceded control of his hourlong interview, but he also failed to get a provocative sound bite from his guest. Mr. Obama said he had learned one lesson from the prolonged debacle over his former pastor, namely that "when you're in national politics, it's always good to pull the Band-Aid off quick," then quickly ignored it, giving long, thoughtful and professorial answers to Mr. Russert instead of changing the subject to his advantage.

    Of course, Mrs. Clinton had the edge right from the start: the first question was about her gas tax holiday, a proposal that her Democratic rival rejects as a gimmick. Mr. Stephanopoulos challenged Mrs. Clinton to name one serious economist in favor of the measure.

    "We've got to get out of this mindset where somehow elite opinion is always on the side of doing things that really disadvantage the vast majority of Americans," Mrs. Clinton retorted crisply. Mrs. Clinton did not even flinch when a woman in the audience, an Obama supporter who said she made less than $25,000 a year, argued she, too, thought Mrs. Clinton was "pandering" for short-term political gain.

    "Call me crazy," the young woman said, "but I actually listen to economists because they know what they studied."

    Mrs. Clinton ignored the sarcasm and rose eagerly to her feet to reply, a power move that put the ABC control room in a quandary: by standing, Mrs. Clinton cut the seated Mr. Stephanopoulos out of the shot. One camera pulled back to try to get the anchor back in the frame, but it was so far away that viewers could barely make out the figures on stage. The camera pulled in on Mrs. Clinton, then moved around to an angle that showed the twosome together, though from behind. Eventually, Mr. Stephanopoulos gave up and stood up next to her, his head several inches below Mrs. Clinton's.

    Mrs. Clinton kept at it. When Mr. Stephanopoulos tried to challenge her on trade policy, she challenged him. "Now, you remember this, because George did work in that '92 campaign, and George and I actually were against Nafta," she said sweetly, addressing the audience. "I'm talking about him in his previous life, before he was an objective journalist and didn't have opinions about such matters."

    When he tried to flummox her by asking whether the campaign would ever release the names of donors who had given money to her husband's foundation, Mrs. Clinton shut him down with a one word answer: "No."

    Television interviews provide snapshots, not full portraits, but that does not make them any less telling. Mr. Obama revealed that he was not impervious to pressure, while Mrs. Clinton once again proved that it takes more than a village to make her sweat.



    Parent

    Hillary's kung fu is the best (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by Ellie on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:45:07 AM EST
    That's how it's done, suckah MCs: take the mic, take the camera, drop the needle.

    Mrs. Clinton ignored the sarcasm and rose eagerly to her feet to reply, a power move that put the ABC control room in a quandary: by standing, Mrs. Clinton cut the seated Mr. Stephanopoulos out of the shot.

    One camera pulled back to try to get the anchor back in the frame, but it was so far away that viewers could barely make out the figures on stage. The camera pulled in on Mrs. Clinton, then moved around to an angle that showed the twosome together, though from behind. Eventually, Mr. Stephanopoulos gave up and stood up next to her, his head several inches below Mrs. Clinton's.

    Potted plant:

    "Call me crazy," the young woman said, "but I actually listen to economists because they know what they studied."

    The same "name one economist" talking point put forth by Stef was also sent out on Press the Meat and by Wolfe Blitzer (The Most Trusting Name in News).

    I wish the three bobbleheads had been challenged back to name a few and make it a multiple choice. :-D


    Parent

    Heh (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Steve M on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:54:19 AM EST
    Why does the media never challenge Republicans to name one economist who thinks tax cuts pay for themselves?

    Parent
    She connected the dots (none / 0) (#9)
    by ruffian on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:13:19 AM EST
    Sorry, I couldn't resist

    Parent
    Tactics (none / 0) (#60)
    by Faust on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:00:56 AM EST
    At first Garin seemed to accept this argument but then other speakers for Clinton seemed to NOT accept it, calling the issue "academic." I strenuously disagree that it is academic and I am at a loss to understand why the Clinton campaign would not at this time accept 2209 as the Magic Number.

    Because even though it is a two edged sword, Clinton's media reputation as a ruthless fighter is in fact a positive as much as a negative.

    My guess would be they do not want to admit of any possibility of an Obama victory through math. In their view Obama can not win through math, but only when Clinton concedes.

    That's my speculation anyway. There are less chartiable speculations that could be offered.


    Yeah. We are reading (none / 0) (#63)
    by oculus on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:07:51 AM EST
    an "A-list Blogger": my test is who gets invited to and to ask a question on a campaign conference call.

    Query:  If Obama reaches the 2025 magic number but doesn't lead in the popular vote [if that is even hypothetically possible], does he have the nomination w/o benefit of a Dem. convention?

    Lies or carelessness? (none / 0) (#76)
    by cannondaddy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:20:22 AM EST
    The RCP average from one month ago Clinton was up 6% in Indiana. Do they not bother to factcheck or do they just think no one else will?  

    Meanwhile, back on the ranch... (none / 0) (#78)
    by white n az on Mon May 05, 2008 at 12:28:14 PM EST
    NBC's own website points out that Obama Falters With Working-Class Whites

    hardly surprising...but it does seem to cover the notion that they can have it both ways on political coverage.

    HRC is smart not to accept any magic number. (none / 0) (#80)
    by g8grl on Mon May 05, 2008 at 01:23:38 PM EST
    It makes perfect sense to me that she will want to go on to the convention where she will win in the second or third ballots.  I think she would prefer to come out as not accepting any decision coming from the delegate count.  She wants the popular vote criteria with MI and FL counting.  

    I hope it works for her.  She's run a terrific campaign considering she's been hamstrung with respect to the things she's allowed to go after Obama with.  I'm not very creative but I can imagine a ton of negative ads that Obama would never be able to recover from.  Let's hope the Republicans get impatient and get them factored into the MSM before the nomination is given to Obama.