A day after she appeared to struggle to give her views on the subject, Hillary Rodham Clinton offered support today for Gov. Eliot Spitzer's effort to award New York driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, as her campaign sought to contain potentially damaging fallout from what her own supporters saw as a tense and listless debate performance.

Mrs. Clinton's statement affirming her support of Mr. Spitzer in his office came less than a day after she offered a muddles and hesitant position on the bill, prompting a round of denunciations by her opponents. It signaled the extent to which her advisers viewed that moment as the biggest misstep she made in the debate, and one with long-term potential to undermine her candidacy.

"Senator Clinton supports governors like Governor Spitzer who believe they need such a measure to deal with the crisis caused by this administration's failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform,'" her campaign said.

Mrs. Clinton's aides said her statement was intended to signal that she broadly supported Mr. Spitzer's goal of awarding driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. Mr. Spitzer initially proposed a blanket program of awarding full-fledged driver's licenses to illegal immigrants; in the face of sharp opposition from the Legislature, he backed off and presented a two-tier program system of awarding licenses to illegal immigrants.

Mrs. Clinton's advisers said that she had not studied either plan, and was not specifically endorsing either of them.

Still, the wording of the statement was murkier than what many of her opponents have said in either supporting or opposing Mr. Spitzer's initiatives. Among those opposing it were Senator Christopher Dodd of Connecticut; Senator Barack Obama of Illinois supported it.

Still, the release of the statement suggested her advisers believed it was politically wiser to embrace a position that could clearly hurt her in a general election rather than risk providing more fuel to what has emerged as a damaging line of criticism: That she, taking advantage of her dominant position in some polls, is not being candid about her views and about would she would do as president.

That argument was voiced by Senator Barack Obama, an Illinois Democrat, in an interview leading up to the debate and set the framework for two hours of attacks on Mrs. Clinton. And it continued this morning as Democratic and Republican presidential candidates attacked her for her answer on Social Security.

"She is a habitual evader," said Mr. Obama's senior strategist, David Axelrod.

And Rudolph W. Giuliani, the Republican presidential candidate who has spent more time attacking Mrs. Clinton than any of his opponents, pounced as he offered a preview of what a Clinton-Giuliani race might be like, should both win their party's nomination, in a radio interview with Glenn Beck.

"You know, she was being attacked all night for taking different positions in front of different audiences and then by the end of the night, she took different positions in front of the same audience," he said. "It was pretty amazing. I mean, in politics I've never quite seen that before."

Mrs. Clinton's campaign fought back on a variety of fronts. It announced that she had won the endorsement of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees union in a Washington news conference in which its president, Gerald W. McEntee, presented Mrs. Clinton with a pair of red boxing gloves and tried to put the best light on her performance the night before.

"Six guys against Hillary," he said. "I'd call that a fair fight. This is one strong woman."

Mrs. Clinton hoisted the gloves, declaring: "When it comes to fighting for America's families I'll go 10 rounds with anyone."

Her campaign sought to stir sympathy of Mrs. Clinton - in a way that was reminiscent of what happened after she was confronted by Rick Lazio, the Long Island Republican, in their Senate race in 2000 - by suggesting that she was the victim of ganging-up by a stage of presidential opponents and one of the moderators, Tim Russert.

"The Politics of Pile-On," Mrs. Clintons' Web site announced this morning. "What happens when the 'politics of pile-on' replaces the 'politics of hope.'" The campaign later released a video that featured Mrs. Clinton's Democratic rivals saying her name repeatedly. A headline on the Drudge Report, which said it was reflecting thinking in Mrs. Clinton's campaign, read, "Scorn: As the Men Gang Up."

Taken together, the events of the day suggested the difficulties Mrs. Clinton faces as she in effect tries to bridge two very different electorates: Democratic primary voters and general election voters. Going into the debate last night, she had been largely successful offering views on Iran, Iraq, and Social Security tailored to a general election audience.

By Adam Nagourney, The New York Times, October 31, 2007

WASHINGTON (AP) - Hillary Rodham Clinton won the presidential endorsement of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees on Wednesday, an important union boost for the Democratic front-runner.

The union is the largest for workers in the public service sector with 1.4 million members nationwide. AFSCME represents government and private workers including nurses, bus drivers, child care providers, custodians and librarians. The New York senator will officially accept the endorsement later Wednesday.

"I am honored to receive the support of AFSCME," Clinton said in a statement. "In my administration, America's working families will again have a partner in the White House."

Gerald McEntee, president of the union, said Clinton "will help rebuild America's middle class and make sure everyone shares in our country's prosperity."

The endorsement is a welcome boost for Clinton in the labor community. The 1.8-million member Service Employees International Union decided not to endorse a candidate on the national level, and SEIU's state chapters have been backing Clinton rivals John Edwards, whose pickups included the New Hampshire chapter on Wednesday, and Barack Obama.

AFSCME is expected to provide help in early-voting states, such as Iowa, where it has about 30,000 members, and New Hampshire, where it has about 3,000. AFSCME budgeted about $48 million for get-out-the-vote efforts in the 2004 election.

The union endorsed former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2004. Dean lost steam after a disappointing performance in Iowa, and Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry went on to win the nomination.

Such endorsements can be key in a primary campaign, not only for the money and publicity a union can provide but for the manpower it can throw behind a candidate in the form of workers to man phone banks and hand out leaflets.

"All of the candidates on the Democratic side of the ticket, they're all speaking our language," McEntee told The Associated Press this summer when asked about the presidential contenders. McEntee has long made overhaul of the nation's health care system a priority for the union. President Clinton named McEntee to serve on the Presidential Advisory Commission on Quality and Consumer Protection in the Health Care Industry in 1997.

Edwards campaign manager David Bonior sought to play down the AFSCME endorsement. "Given that 30 percent of their national membership lives in New York, and the long history that President Clinton has with President McEntee, this comes as no surprise," said Bonior, who focused on the SEIU chapters that had backed Edwards.

In a telephone interview with The Associated Press, Obama said the endorsement wasn't a surprise. "We have obviously got strong support from a number of AFSCME locals, but Gerry McEntee has a long relationship with Bill Clinton, he takes pride in having been one of the first to endorse him. And so, I think it was anticipated."

Other unions that have endorsed Clinton include the United Transportation Union and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, both in August.

The AFL-CIO and its unions said in September they will spend an estimated $200 million on the 2008 elections, with the nation's largest labor federation devoting a record $53 million to grass-roots mobilization.

Former North Carolina Sen. Edwards has been endorsed by the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners, the United Steelworkers of America, the United Mine Workers of America and the Transport Workers Union, as well as about a dozen state chapters of the Service Employees International Union.

Illinois Sen. Obama has been endorsed by the Correction Officers' Benevolent Association, as well as the Illinois and Indiana chapters of the service employees union.

Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut was endorsed by the International Association of Fire Fighters in August. The union's endorsement played a significant role in boosting Kerry's successful bid for the Democratic nomination in 2004.

The New Hampshire SEIU endorsement, meanwhile, has caused concern among some of the group's leaders in the state. According to several people involved, the union's state board decided early last week to endorse Obama - not Edwards. State president Gary Smith even spoke with Obama by telephone to inform him, according to one person familiar with the conversation, speaking on condition of anonymity because the discussion was meant to be private.

Then-board member Stephen Foster said, "President Smith now says that the board goofed on procedure and that somehow that nullifies the Tuesday vote."

The board met again last Friday and decided to wait for a straw poll at the annual convention the next day. In that straw poll, 50 members said they were undecided or favored no endorsement at that time. Edwards got 23 votes, Obama 19 and Clinton 14.

By Jesse J. Holland, Associated Press, October 31, 2007

What if the current polls in Iowa are the final result? What if Romney wins in Iowa and then comes in first again in New Hampshire? What if Giuliani stumbles badly in Iowa and finishes fourth? What if Huckabee surges and finishes second in Iowa? What if Fred Thompson makes an unimpressive third-place finish there?

And, on the Democratic side, what if Hillary only narrowly beats Obama in the first caucus state?

With two months to go before the Iowa caucus, everything can change, and probably will, but it is worth speculating on what the impact will be if things don't change much from now until then.

On the Republican side, a Romney victory in Iowa would virtually guarantee a win in New Hampshire. The two states, in media terms, are practically one. Two-thirds of New Hampshire lives in the southern part of the state that watches Boston television every night. Since Romney served as governor in Massachusetts, he will probably win New Hampshire anyway. A win in Iowa would make it a fait accompli.

Two victories would make Romney the front-runner for the Republican nomination. Coupled with a Giuliani stumble in Iowa, it could totally change the dynamic of the Republican primary. Here's what might happen:

Rudy could come to be seen as too antagonistic to the Christian right, and moderates might once again turn to McCain as the less inflammatory option, sidetracking the former New York mayor. Huckabee, coming in a strong second, could take off and become the poor man's Romney, taking advantage of his greater consistency on social issues, his Christian (read: non-Mormon) beliefs, and his support of the Fair Tax as an alternative to the IRS.

Republicans would likely panic about the idea of a Mormon candidate and worry about his prospects, making Huckabee and either Rudy or McCain viable as alternatives. Thompson will be forced out, having lost his position as the socially conservative answer to Rudy.

And on the Democratic side, Edwards, who had been leading in Iowa until recently, would probably have to leave the race. That would coalesce the entire ABH vote (Anybody But Hillary) around Obama, giving him a leg up in the national race.

Hillary's vulnerability, newly revealed in the Iowa vote, could create a sense that she might not be electable given her baggage and lead Democratic voters to look seriously at Obama. The result could be a real slugfest between the two candidates, making a mockery of the idea that her nomination is inevitable.

And the outcome? Hillary probably still wins. The history of Democratic primaries has always been that challengers emerge and run stronger than anyone believed they would but then fade and the front-runner prevails after all (see Bradley in 2000, Tsongas after New Hampshire and Brown after Connecticut in 1992, Gore after the Southern primaries in 1988, Hart in 1984 and Kennedy in 1980).

And among the Republicans? Who knows? The race would be thrown into chaos. Anyone could win. Romney would have the momentum, but doubts about his ability to win as a Mormon would make his lead unstable. Huckabee would be gaining, but he may not be well enough known to make it. Giuliani could still recover, given his strong national standing, but would be hobbled. And McCain would still have his immigration position hanging over his head, but as Rudy falters, he might pick up the slack.

Then again, Hillary could open up a large lead in Iowa as her juggernaut gets going. And Rudy could, at least, finish a strong second to Romney in Iowa, and perhaps beat him, making it a Giuliani-Romney runoff in the main primaries, which Rudy probably wins. Then the general election match-up would be Hillary vs. Rudy, as we have all anticipated.

But what if?

By Dick Morris, Real Clear Politics, October 31, 2007

In a topsy-turvy presidential campaign, with hundreds of millions of dollars already raised and a January jam-packed with key events as never before, candidates are challenging some traditional notions about the best path to the White House.

In races past, candidates typically spent most heavily in the early going on the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary, then had time to shift resources to larger, later states if the nomination hadn't been sewed up yet.

This campaign season is shaping up differently, especially for Republicans, where two major candidates -- Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson -- are spending their budgets most heavily on Florida. That state's Jan. 29 primary has made it for the first time a potential kingmaker along with Iowa and New Hampshire. Among Republicans, Mitt Romney is also a big spender in Florida.

For Democrats, the growing dominance of Hillary Rodham Clinton, challenged by a struggling but well-financed Barack Obama, has led unprecedented millions to be poured into Iowa -- twice as much as into New Hampshire. Iowa's Jan. 3 caucus has taken on greater importance for Democrats than four or eight years ago because it is the single best chance for Mr. Obama and John Edwards to stop Mrs. Clinton. None of the Democratic candidates are active in Florida because the national party, angry at the state for moving its vote so early, has forbidden campaigning there.

The shape of the campaign emerges from a Wall Street Journal analysis of campaign spending reports released earlier this month. The Journal estimated spending in each state choosing a candidate in January by analyzing campaign filings and gathering data on television-advertising spending and staffing.

"The Democrats are being very much condensed and focused on Iowa, whereas Republicans are pursuing a less conventional strategy," says Evan Tracey, an analyst with TNS Media Intelligence/CMAG, a political media research firm. "Campaigns are having to make some tough choices as far as the states where they put their money."

Six states have primaries or caucuses for both parties in January -- Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Nevada, Michigan and Florida. A seventh, Wyoming, will select among Republicans. Then, on Feb. 5, California, New York, Illinois and other big states vote in what could be the campaign's decisive day.

The new schedule means voters in some large states may play a more central role in choosing the parties' candidates than in earlier years, when the stretched-out campaign meant the victor was often effectively decided before many big states voted.

Mr. Giuliani, the former New York mayor, spent more money in Florida in the first nine months of the year than he did in either Iowa or New Hampshire, according to the Journal analysis. He believes that even if he loses the earlier states, transplanted Northeasterners and Jewish voters in Florida could carry him to victory in that state's Jan. 29 primary. Then he would attempt to leverage the momentum on the big primary day. Mr. Giuliani's aides have played down his chances in Iowa, claiming they would be happy with a fourth-place finish.

Mr. Thompson, a former Tennessee senator, has less money to spend than Mr. Giuliani, but he too is giving considerable attention to Florida. Through Sept. 30, he spent twice as much in Florida as in Iowa. Mr. Thompson's national political director is based in Florida, which accounts for a lot of his spending there, his campaign said. Mr. Thompson is also focusing heavily on South Carolina, though he hadn't yet spent much money there as of last month.

Mr. Romney, a former venture capitalist who has lent his campaign more than $17 million and has spent more than any other Republican candidate, has spent the most of any Republican in Florida -- more than $2 million. But that is only about half of what he has spent in Iowa and New Hampshire each, reflecting the divergent strategies of the candidates.

The national Republican Party didn't issue any ban on its candidates campaigning in Florida, although it has threatened to reduce the size of Florida delegation at the national convention.

On the Democratic side of the race, the driving dynamic is the growing edge held by Mrs. Clinton. She now leads Illinois Sen. Obama in national polls by an average of 26 percentage points, according to Real Clear Politics, a Web site that tracks survey trends.

Both Mr. Obama and former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, who generally places third in the polls, have turned increasingly critical of the former first lady in their stump rhetoric. They were hoping to use a Democratic debate in Philadelphia last night to shake up the calculus of the race.

Mrs. Clinton keeps "changing positions whenever it's politically convenient," Mr. Obama said in the debate. Mr. Edwards said trusting Mrs. Clinton to change the direction of the country was like believing in the tooth fairy or Santa Claus. "If people want the status quo, Sen. Clinton's your candidate," Mr. Edwards said.

Polls show Mrs. Clinton's lead in Iowa is the smallest among the early-voting states. The Obama and Edwards campaigns have concluded that if they can weaken the front-runner there, momentum could shift against her in New Hampshire and the other states that follow in rapid succession. That is forcing Mrs. Clinton to spend heavily in Iowa as well.

The spending reports show that all three have spent about twice as much money in Iowa as they have in New Hampshire, and far more than in any of the other early-voting states. Mr. Obama has spent between $5 million and $6 million in Iowa through Sept. 30, according to the Journal's calculations, compared with $3 million to $4 million for Mrs. Clinton.

That includes roughly $3 million on television ads for Mr. Obama, compared with $2 million for Mrs. Clinton, according to Mr. Tracey, the political-media analyst. Mr. Obama has opened 32 offices in Iowa and has at least 110 staffers there, his campaign reports show. Mrs. Clinton has 24 offices there with at least 65 staffers. Her aides said yesterday she would hire another 100 campaign workers in Iowa.

"The expectations for Obama in Iowa are very high," said Donna Brazile, a Democratic strategist who managed Al Gore's campaign for president in 2000 and is neutral in the 2008 race.

Mr. Edwards has lagged in fund raising and spending, and he has only 15 field offices in Iowa. Mr. Edwards has accepted public financing to supplement his campaign and agreed to the strict spending limits that go with it.

Even with his heavy spending in Iowa, Mr. Obama has raised so much cash -- $74.9 million so far for the Democratic primary -- that a setback in the first caucus wouldn't force him to quit. "He could still come in second or even third and be viable," says Ms. Brazile. Not so for Mr. Edwards, who has raised less than half as much as Mr. Obama, though he will get a cash infusion of $10 million through the public financing system. For him, "Iowa is a do-or-die moment," Ms. Brazile said.

A spokesman for Mr. Edwards took issue with Ms. Brazile's analysis. "Don't be fooled -- Iowa is crucial for everyone, and that's why each of our opponents are spending millions of dollars and most of their time there," Eric Schultz said.

By Mary Jacoby and T.W. Farnam, Wall Street Journal, October 31, 2007

NEW YORK - It could be a long two months for Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton if she continues to sidestep questions on big issues.

With just seven weeks to go until the leadoff Iowa caucuses, the New York senator has become the target for her Democratic rivals, especially Barack Obama and John Edwards, who are openly questioning her candor, integrity and electability.

Clinton has fought back using a classic front-runner's playbook, trying to avoid direct confrontations with the other Democrats while taking her fight to Republicans, especially President Bush.

But by avoiding questions on important issues - from Social Security overhaul to driver's licenses for illegal immigrants - Clinton risks playing into a narrative her rivals are eager to establish: that she is slippery, evasive and overly political.

"Whether it's accurate or not, people have this sense that she has an 'ends justify means' approach to being accurate and consistent," said Dennis Goldford, a political scientist at Iowa's Drake University. "That's her vulnerability, and it's where Edwards and Obama will go nuclear eventually."

It may happen sooner rather than later. On Wednesday, Obama contended that Clinton's performance in a televised forum Tuesday night showed she was not willing to give straight answers.

"I think last night's debate really exposed this fault line," Obama told The Associated Press. "Senator Clinton left us wondering where she stood on every single hard question from Iran to Social Security to driver's licenses for undocumented workers."

For its part, the Clinton campaign sent a memo to reporters asking: "What happens when the 'politics of pile-on' replaces the 'politics of hope?'"

___

Here are some of the issues in question:

- Driver's licenses for illegal immigrants: In the debate, Clinton hedged on whether she supports a plan offered by New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer to grant licenses to illegal immigrants. Foes of the idea are in an uproar, though eight other states, including conservative Utah, already allow undocumented immigrants to obtain licenses.

At first, Clinton appeared to praise the plan. "What Governor Spitzer is trying to do is fill the vacuum left by the failure of this administration to bring about comprehensive immigration reform," she said.

Pressed later on the matter, she seemed to backtrack.

"I did not say that it should be done, but I certainly recognize why Governor Spitzer is trying to do it," she said - a verbal contortion her opponents eagerly seized.

Clinton later called it a "gotcha" question. But her advisers acknowledge she seemed unprepared for it, even though it's been a major point of contention recently in her home state.

Taylor Moran of the National Immigration Law Center said that while Clinton "may have waffled a bit," the crux of her answer reflected the reality that states face. "Everyone in this country recognizes our immigration system is broken," Moran said. "Without reforms, what is a governor supposed to do with a large undocumented population in his state?"

Obama said he supported granting licenses to undocumented workers, while rival Chris Dodd said he opposed the idea.

- Social Security: Beyond committing herself to "fiscal responsibility" if she is elected president, Clinton has publicly refused to say how she would keep the Social Security system solvent. Obama and Edwards have said they would raise the level of income subject to the tax, currently about $97,500 per year.

Clinton has said she doesn't want to raise the payroll taxes, raise the eligibility age or privatize the system, and she recently began airing a television ad in Iowa pledging to protect the program. She also says she'd favor a bipartisan commission to study the problem and offer solutions - something Obama and Edwards have also advocated.-

But an Associated Press reporter overheard Clinton privately tell an Iowa voter that while she didn't want to put an additional tax burden on the middle class, she'd consider a "gap," with no Social Security taxes on income from $97,500 to around $200,000. Anything above that could be taxed.

Edwards also supports such a gap, while Obama said he believes the current cap should be lifted from its current level.

Asked in Tuesday's debate about a public-private contradiction, Clinton said she wasn't advocating a tax increase but would simply consider it.

"Everybody knows what the possibilities are," she said. "But I do not advocate it. I do not support it."

Clinton advisers stand by her approach to the topic, arguing that Social Security is too complex a problem to solve in a one-minute debate answer.

Goldford said Clinton was "trying to have it both ways" on Social Security. He said she should simply acknowledge she doesn't yet have the answer to the problem.

"She's got to find a way of saying, 'We will safeguard the Social Security system. We don't know how to do it, but we've got to do it.' Stop focusing on the means and focus on the goal," he said.

- Clinton Library: Hillary Clinton says she has no control over the release of documents from her husband's presidential library, including those that cover her eight years as first lady. Representatives of the National Archives are slowly processing more than 100 million documents, and most will not be released until after the 2008 election.

Both Clintons say they favor full disclosure of the material. In 2002, President Clinton sent a letter to the National Archives, saying "my intent is to make available to the public as full a record as possible" of his White House years. But he also asked that the Archives consider withholding certain categories of information, including personal correspondence between himself and his wife.

"President Clinton has authorized the National Archives to release more presidential records faster than any other president subject to the Presidential Records Act," said Clinton campaign spokesman Jay Carson, who until recently had worked for the former president.

In Tuesday's debate, Obama said the Clintons should speed the release of all documents, arguing that they speak directly to the experience she says she would bring to the presidency.

"Well, that's not my decision to make, and I don't believe that any president or first lady ever has," Clinton replied. "But, certainly, we're moving as quickly as our circumstances and the processes of the National Archives permits."

By Beth Fouhy, Associated Press, October 31, 2007

As front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, Clinton appeared unfazed by the debate, telling a reporter she "was prepared" and joked, "I used to play touch football with my brothers." The New York senator left it to her campaign to point out that 26 of the 52 questions at the debate were about her.

At a morning news conference to announce bipartisan Senate and House legislation that would make permanent the historic preservation efforts begun by Laura Bush and Clinton while she served as first lady, Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., referred to the debate.

"I wasn't sure you'd get here today," Domenici told Clinton. "It was all against you and you looked terrific."

"It might have been a little bit difficult for me to be here, but I wouldn't have missed it," Clinton responded when she took her turn speaking at the Sewall-Belmont House and Museum, which once served as headquarters for the National Woman's Party. She said the bipartisan legislation "is a way of saying we can work together."

Clinton used the Senate hearing on nuclear waste disposal to reiterate her opposition to using Yucca Mountain in Nevada as a permanent repository, a point she repeated later in the day in a campaign conference call with reporters in Nevada, one of the early primary states.

Clinton showed her feistier side at the news conference to accept an endorsement from the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees.

"I'll go 10 rounds with anybody," Clinton joked as she accepted a pair of red boxing gloves from AFSCME President Gerald McEntee.

At the moment, Clinton's biggest challenge for capturing the Democratic nomination appears to be the hotly contested Jan 3 caucuses in Iowa, where AFSCME considers itself the largest labor union with about 30,000 members, many of them state employees.

Clinton told the union audience she would "cut 500,000 private contracting jobs" during her first year as president. She didn't say whether any of the 500,000 federal contractors would be replaced with new federal employees, who presumably might swell the ranks of federal government unions.

"There is no evidence that they're saving us money, that they are doing the job we that we expect them to do," Clinton said. "There are now more private contractors being paid with our tax dollars than there are civilian and military employees combined. And I don't think most Americans know that. We are just looking at the tip of a very dirty iceberg."

By Brian Tumulty, USA Today, October 31, 2007

The Fix grew up a HUGE fan of professional wrestling. So, it was with a mixture of fascination and glee that we watched last night's Democratic presidential debate, which resembled nothing so much as an out and our brawl.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) spent the first hour of the debate fending off shots from her opponents and parrying pointed questions from the moderators. Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) made good on his pledge to be more aggressive against Clinton, albeit it in the low-key manner that has come to be his trademark in this campaign. Former Sen. John Edwards (N.C.), on the other hand, took it directly to Clinton -- challenging her at every turn and effectively ensuring that the stories coming out of the debate didn't focus solely on Clinton versus Obama.

Even Sens. Chris Dodd (Conn.), Joe Biden (Del.) and Gov. Bill Richardson (N.M.) got in their shots -- although this debate was designed (rightfully so, to our mind) to give Obama, Edwards and Clinton a chance to mix it up.

Below you'll find our winners and losers from last night's debate. We added a "tweener" category for this debate because several of the candidates had performances that didn't seem to fit into either the winner or loser side. As always, these ratings are subjective. Agree? Disagree?

WINNERS
John Edwards: We've said it before and we'll say it again: Edwards continues to make the strongest case against Clinton of any candidate in the field. Time and again last night, Edwards one-upped Obama's hits on Clinton by using his courtroom skills to deliver devastating one-liners about the New York Senator and her record. On Iran: "Are we going to hear 'If only I knew then what I know now,'" Edwards asked. On electability: "[Republicans] may actually want to run against you." On change: "If people want the status quo, Senator Clinton is your candidate." Was Edwards too angry? Too confrontational? Maybe. But, the anti-Clinton crowd wants someone to stand up strongly against her. Edwards showed he was willing to do that last night.

"Sabre Rattling": Wow. The Fix lost count of how many times the candidates uttered this phrase last night in reference to the Bush Administration's policy toward Iran. Edwards and Obama used it to hit Clinton; Clinton used it to hit the Bush Administration. Sabres were being rattled EVERYWHERE.

TWEENERS

Barack Obama: Obama promised more aggression and he delivered -- sort of. The Illinois Senator was clearly committed to drawing contrasts with Clinton last night, even though it still feels as though he is forcing it at times. (Our read on Obama: he is not someone who enjoys direct confrontation and is still learning the political necessity of the tactic.) Obama's best line of the night (and one of the debate's highlights) came after Clinton refused to offer a clear answer on releasing the correspondence between herself and her busband during their time in the White House. "I'm glad that Hillary [used] the phrase "turn the page" but this is an example of not turning the page," Obama said. "Part of what we have to do is to invite the American people to take part in their government again." That message -- Obama as change agent -- is a powerful one; as the campaign has worn on, Obama has honed it nicely. So why not make him a winner? At times Obama seemed to wander into wonky policy talk on issues, letting his professorial side come out a bit too much. The more Obama sounds like every one else on the stage, the less chance he has of convincing voters he can and will change the status quo.

Hillary Rodham Clinton: After the first hour of the debate, Clinton seemed nearly-certain to wind up in the winner's circle again. She had largely faced down a withering barrage of attacks from Obama and Edwards (notable exception: her non-answer on opening up the National Archives) and come out none the worse for wear. And then she slipped. In the debate's final minutes, Clinton got caught trying to be too cute by half on whether she supported Gov. Eliot Spitzer's (D-N.Y.) plan to offer drivers licenses to illegal immigrants. Sensing a rare opportunity, Sen. Chris Dodd (Conn.) jumped in to question Clinton and was followed in the piling on by Edwards and Obama who sought to cast Clinton's answer as typical of her tendency to offer the political rather than the honest answer. That the moment came at the close of the debate was a double edged sword for Clinton: on one hand, it left viewers with a sour taste in their mouth and may have colored her performance overall; on the other, it was nearly 11 p.m. by then and the viewership had probably declined somewhat significantly so less people saw the slip. Why not make Clinton a loser then? Because for the majority of the debate she acquitted herself well despite having the deck stacked heavily against her. In the first hour, nearly every question and response started and ended with Clinton. Might she have won points among women who saw a bunch of men going out of their way to gang up on her?

LOSERS
Bill Richardson: On a night when both Dodd and Biden had their moments, Richardson struggled. In every debate and every answer, it feels as though Richardson is trying to stuff 10 pounds of rhetoric into a five pound bag. Part of that is because he doesn't get as much time to address issues as the frontrunners. But, knowing he isn't likely to get as many opportunities, Richardson needs to have adjusted by now to take advantage of the chances he does get. Thinking back on the debate, it's hard to find a moment where Richardson distinguished himself -- with the possible exception of his defense of Clinton. Then, after the debate, Richardson seemed to side with the pro-UFO crowd in response to a joking question by MSNBC's Chris Matthews. Um, not good.

Lightning Rounds: For those who followed The Fix's live-blogging of the debate last night, you've already heard our rant against lightning rounds. While a great idea in theory (allow all of the candidates to sound off on an issue in a short period of time) these lightning rounds just don't work because there is no real penalty for a candidate going far over the allotted time in their answer. Our suggestion? If we are set on keeping lightining rounds, create a real penalty for candidates who don't follow the rules. Maybe the next round of questions skips them? Ok, that's never going to happen, but a boy can dream.

By Chris Cillizza, The Washington Post, October 31, 2007

After withstanding a series of pointed questions from her rivals in the debate's first hour, Clinton appeared to commit an unforced error when answering a question on whether she supported Gov. Eliot Spitzer's (D-N.Y.) plan to offer drivers licenses to illegal immigrants.

Tim Russert asked Clinton why she had told a New Hampshire newspaper that the plan "makes a lot of sense."

Clinton replied that Spitzer is "trying to fill the vacuum left by the failure this administration to bring about comprehensive immigration reform." After the interlude of a Dodd answer on the same subject Clinton added, "I just want to add, I did not say it should be done, but I certainly understand why Governor Spitzer is trying to do it."

Later pressed by co-moderator Tim Russert a perturbed Clinton said that Russert was asking her a "gotcha" question.

"What is the governor supposed to do?" Clinton asked. "We have failed, George Bush has failed. Do I think this is the best thing for any governor to do? No. But do I understand the sense of real desperation of trying to get a handle on this? Remember, in New York, we want to know who is in New York, we want people to come out of the shadows. He's making an honest effort to do it. WE should have passed immigration reform."

Edwards and Obama immediately pounced. Edwards said "Sen. Clinton just said two different things in two minutes" and accused Clinton of "double-talk." Obama said, "I don't know if she is for it or against it."

By Chris Cillizza, The Washington Post, October 30, 2007

If you're listening to the media reports of the day, tonight's Democratic presidential debate at Drexel University in Philly promises a bloodbath.

It is, the pundits say, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's moment to leave a floundering field of also-rans behind, to show, as her campaign has pitched again and again, that she has the strength and experience to be president.

Those same marketers of conventional wisdom assert that if Illinois Sen. Barack Obama doesn't step up tonight with a firm and convincing argument for his candidacy, and with a meaningful critique of Clinton (see Iran or health care or her Iraq vote or the fear of a Bush/Clinton cyclical dynasty), he's through. He is under enormous pressure to draw tangible distinctions, to get tough, to show his supporters (and funders) that he's in the fight. Politics of hope, be damned. We'll see.

Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, meanwhile, has so struggled to make headway in the polls that he, too, despite a solid following in Iowa, faces a growing challenge in defining how an Edwards presidency would actually differ from a Clinton or Obama administration. Talk of public financing of campaigns and Clinton's special interest cash just hasn't jazzed voters.

But with all the build-up, the candidates have only to look back four years to see that sometimes patience alone, coupled with a steady message of electability, wins out -- even if the on-fire frontrunner once seemed invincible. Frontrunners have a knack for fumbling.

Ask Howard Dean.

But a relentlessly-disciplined Clinton enters the Drexel face-off with undeniably strong national poll numbers and a growing lead in New Hampshire. According to a survey released late last week by the New Hampshire Institute of Politics at Saint Anselm College, HRC has a 21-point lead over Obama. And her team is prepping for those anticipated attacks, which could be levied by second tier candidates as well.

"Does the 'politics of hope' mean launching attacks on one candidate?" wrote Mark Penn, Clinton's chief strategist, in a memo posted on the campaign's Website. "Or does it mean laying out a vision for the American people? Does it mean questioning a rival's integrity? Or does it mean talking about the change we need?"

The debate - the Democrats' seventh - will be hosted by NBC's Brian Williams with questions from Tim Russert.

By Jennifer Skalka, The Hotline, October 30, 2007

PHILADELPHIA -- Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) said at Tuesday night's Democratic debate that his pledge to be more aggressive in targeting frontrunner Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) had been "over-hyped."

But Obama and former Sen. John Edwards (N.C.) made sure the much anticipated brawl lived up to its billing.

Obama and Edwards engaged in a tag-team match throughout the debate, taking turns criticizing Clinton at every opportunity, with Edwards repeatedly calling Clinton the candidate of the "status quo" and Obama saying Clinton represents the kind of politics of which Americans have tired.

"One of the reasons I think Republicans are obsessed with you, Hillary, is because that's a fight they're very comfortable having," Obama said.

"They may actually want to run against you," Edwards added. "That's the reason they keep bringing you up."

Edwards at times took a much harsher and direct approach as he criticized Clinton, but Obama was clearly more aggressive in confronting the frontrunner than he has been in the past.

After Clinton, under intense and direct questioning from co-moderator Tim Russert, said she is in favor of documents from her husband's administration being open to the public and "turning the page" on the Bush administration, Obama took her to task for not being sincere.

"I'm glad that Hillary took the phrase 'turn the page.' It's a good phrase," Obama said. "But that's an example of not turning the page."

The first part of the debate was focused almost exclusively on Clinton's vote in favor of the recent Iran resolution designating the Iranian Republican Guard as a terrorist organization.

After Clinton said she would be in favor of passing legislation that prevents Bush from going to war with Iran without congressional approval, Edwards said the New York senator had already helped give that approval with her vote.

"So the way to do that is to vote 'yes' on a resolution that looks like it was literally written by the neocons?" Edwards said. "The way you stand up to this administration is you say 'no.'"

Obama cast doubt on Clinton's credibility on the issue by calling her "one of the co-authors of this engagement in Iraq."

Clinton, for the most part, played defense, returning fire indirectly at Obama, who missed the vote, and saying that she is not in favor of "doing nothing."

"Some may want a false choice between rushing to war as Republicans want... and doing nothing," Clinton said. "I prefer vigorous diplomacy."

The lower-tier candidates also took shots at Clinton, with Sen. Chris Dodd (Conn.) calling into question her electability in the general election.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (Ohio) followed Edwards' criticism of Clinton's support from "special interests" by pointing out that the former senator has worked for a hedge fund and suggesting that neither has the ethical high ground.

Clinton and Obama also jousted over social security, with Clinton saying the so-called "looming crisis" is a Republican talking point. Obama took exception to that argument and maintained there is an emerging problem with the program.

After the first half of the two hour debate at Drexel University, Clinton found some allies on the edges of the stage as New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson called Edwards and Obama's criticisms "holier than thou" and "coming close to personal attacks." Richardson urged the candidates to save their ammunition for Republicans.

Sen. Joseph Biden (Del.) scored some of the night's biggest laughs from the audience when, after he said he is not running against Clinton, he lashed out at GOP frontrunner and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, whose sentences, Biden said, consist of "a noun, a verb and 9-11."

"He is genuinely not qualified to be president," Biden said.

By Sam Youngman and Aaron Blake, The Hill, October 30, 2007

Presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are running neck-and-neck, with John Edwards sinking to third place among Democrats, a new University of Iowa poll of likely caucusgoers shows.

Clinton was the top Democrat in the poll with 28.9 percent, buoyed by support among women and those 45 and older. Obama had 26.6 percent, within the poll's margin of error, and was the "overwhelming" choice of those under 45, the poll's authors said.

Among Republicans, the Hawkeye Poll found presidential candidate Mitt Romney far ahead of the rest of the pack and showed Mike Huckabee making gains, particularly among evangelical Christians. Romney had 36.2 percent in the poll, compared with 27.8 percent in August. Huckabee, still benefiting from his success at the GOP straw poll, surged from 1.8 percent in August to
12.8 percent.

The random statewide poll of likely caucusgoers was conducted from Oct. 17 to Oct. 24 by David Redlawsk and Caroline Tolbert, professors of political science at the University of Iowa, with the assistance of students. It was carried out by the university's Social Science Research Center and was paid for by the U of I provost and the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences.

Redlawsk is the Johnson County chairman for the Edwards campaign and an active Democrat, but he said his political involvement did not influence his ability to oversee the poll as an academic. Tolbert and the students did most of the analysis, he said. "I like to believe that when I put on my professor hat, I'm pretty straight down the middle," Redlawsk said at a Washington news conference.

The Democratic sample was made up of 306 likely caucusgoers, with a margin of error of plus or minus 5.5 percentage points.

The Republican sample was made up of 285 likely caucusgoers, with a margin of error of plus or minus 5.8 percentage points.

Among Democrats, support for Edwards dropped from 26 percent in August to 20 percent now, while Obama and Clinton gained support in the same period. Obama picked up 7.3 percentage points, while Clinton picked up 4.1 percentage points.

Men who were surveyed preferred Obama, then Edwards and then Clinton, while women ranked Clinton first, followed by Obama and Edwards.

Clinton and Edwards were the most popular among the 18 percent of households that reported having a union member.

Among Republicans, Rudy Giuliani had second place to himself in the August poll but now has Huckabee and Thompson for competition. Giuliani had 13.1 percent in the new poll, compared with 12.8 percent for Huckabee and 11.4 percent for Fred Thompson. Male voters preferred Giuliani and Thompson, the poll's authors said, while Romney was the only Republican candidate who did better among women than men. Romney also did very well among the oldest caucusgoers, while Huckabee succeeded with baby boomers, Redlawsk said.




By Jane Norman, Des Moines Register, October 30, 2007

Tonight, the debate's all about Hillary Clinton, Democratic front-runner.

It may not take a heat-seeking missile to raise a debate with the front-running Democratic candidate for president, but six of Sen. Hillary Clinton's rivals are on call tonight.

The televised debate, a two-hour face-off coming live from Philadelphia on MSNBC and starting at 9 pm EDT, arrives after many previous debates in which Democrats have failed to shake the apparent claim that Clinton holds on her party's nomination for president in 2008.

It comes just a little more than two months from the premier Iowa caucuses, in which Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois and former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina hope to start putting Clinton's nomination in some other perspective than that of a foregone conclusion.

With Obama on stage at Drexel University and pledging to take the fight to Clinton, and with Edwards, who found that playing the nice guy was no formula for success in 2004, also ready to raise the stakes, Clinton's own skills will be on high display tonight.

The stage will be a little lighter tonight, with NBC having finally set a cutoff for candidates who have no visible means of support, meaning former Sen. Mike Gravel of Alaska. Yet this will help provide some of the other single-digit scrappers in this contest a somewhat higher profile.

By Mark Silva, The Swamp, October 30, 2007

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Hillary Clinton got her retaliation in first at rivals Barack Obama and John Edwards, ahead of her latest campaign debate clash Tuesday with fellow Democratic White House hopefuls.

Clinton was girding for a rough ride in Philadelphia, the "City of Brotherly Love," after both challengers cranked up the pace and tone of their attacks on her stands on Iran, Iraq, domestic priorities and her ties to corporations.

The former first lady holds a double digit opinion poll lead over the pair, who are facing pressure to shake up the Democratic race as time runs out before the first party nominating contest, the Iowa caucuses, on January 3.

Hours before the debate, the former first lady launched a counter-attack, as her campaign released a memo entitled "Where are the Politics of Hope?"

The memo played off Obama's signature theme, to accuse him of abandoning his vow to cleanse politics and descending to gutter-level campaign tactics.

The Clinton campaign also posted videos on one of her campaign websites, featuring Illinois Senator Obama, and former Democratic vice presidential nominee John Edwards, speaking out against hardball campaign attacks.

"The campaigns shouldn't be about making each other look bad," Obama was featured as saying earlier this year.

"If you are looking for a candidate who will do the best job of attacking other Democrats, I am not your guy," Edwards said in a video dating from his previous presidential run in 2004.

Obama argues Clinton's stands on foreign policy issues like Iran and Iraq are politically expedient, and paints her as a symptom of bitter partisanship in Washington, while Edwards has accused her of cosying up to big corporations.

But Clinton, who has barely put a foot wrong in the 2008 Democratic race for president, has performed strongly in all previous encounters leading up to Tuesday's showdown with seven other Democratic hopefuls.

Obama has for months invoked the "politics of hope" but is adding new steel to his lofty rhetoric, in a bid to thwart Clinton's campaign.

In a RealClearPolitics.com average of national opinion surveys, Clinton has a 26 point lead over Obama, with Edwards, the 2004 Democratic vice presidential nominee, in third.

Obama told Sunday's New York Times Clinton was hiding her positions for political gain and had not been truthful with the electorate.

"I don't think people know what her agenda exactly is," he said.

Edwards on Monday meanwhile accused Clinton of cosying up to big business, saying in New Hampshire that her "road to the middle class takes a major detour right through the deep canyon of corporate lobbyists."

A new poll Monday had Obama locked in a tight battle with the former first lady in Iowa, with Edwards third.

Clinton led the new University of Iowa survey with 28.9 percent, followed by Obama with 26.6 percent, with Edwards sliding on 20 percent.

The state is crucial to both men. Analysts say victory in Iowa would give Obama a boost which could allow him to challenge Clinton in other key states, while his defeat may effectively crown her as presumptive nominee.

A bad loss for Edwards in a state where he has invested heavily, and which leads a long list of primary and caucus nominating contests, would likely effectively end his campaign.

AFP, October 30, 2007

Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney can both take heart from the latest poll results. They're leading in all three crucial early-voting states: Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.

On the Democratic side, Clinton has jumped ahead of Barack Obama and John Edwards in Iowa, where her rivals are trying to stop her nomination express, according to the new American Research Group survey. Clinton claims support from 32 percent of likely caucus-goers in Iowa, 40 percent of likely primary voters in New Hampshire, and 41 percent in South Carolina. Obama is second and Edwards third in all three states.

On the Republican side, Romney continues to lead in Iowa with 27 percent of likely caucus-goers, while Mike Huckabee has jumped to second with 19 percent, according to the survey. Romney now also leads in South Carolina with 29 percent and in New Hampshire with 30 percent. Rudy Giuliani is second in those two states.

Each state poll was conducted Oct. 26-29 among 600 likely voters on both the Democratic Republican sides and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

By Foon Rhee, The Boston Globe, October 30, 2007

Claiming that both Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) and former Sen. John Edwards (N.C.) are going negative in the race for the Democratic nomination, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's (N.Y.) chief strategist said Tuesday that the former first lady is the only candidate running on "the politics of hope," a term Obama used to define his campaign.

"Does the 'politics of hope' mean launching attacks on one candidate?" Clinton strategist Mark Penn asked in a campaign memo - a jab at Obama and Edwards, who have become more critical of the New York senator in recent weeks. "Or does it mean laying out a vision for the American people? Does it mean questioning a rival's integrity? Or does it mean talking about the change we need?"

Penn touted Clinton's proposed plans to end the war in Iraq, provide healthcare to all Americans and boost the middle class.

"Contrast that with the campaigns of our two leading rivals, both of whom made their names by promising a 'politics of hope' and have now abandoned that promise," Penn stated.

However, with regard to comments Clinton has made about her rivals, the strategist said, "Hillary will not hesitate to set the record straight on the issues that opponents raise about her."

The Obama and Edwards campaigns did not respond to requests for comment by the time this article was published.

By Klaus Marre, The Hill, October 30, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton remains ahead of two prospective rivals in the United States presidential race, according to a poll by RT Strategies for the Cook Political Report. 43 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in next year's election, while 39 per cent would support former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani.

In another match-up, Rodham Clinton holds a seven-point lead over former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, October 29, 2007

Democrats, Republicans Chart Various Paths in Seeking Party's Nomination

This unprecedented primary calendar of the 2008 election cycle -- with its earliest-ever Iowa caucus and multistate Super Duper Tuesday Feb. 5 -- is providing Democrats and Republicans with both promise and pitfalls.

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., held another event targeted at Iowa college students today, this one sponsored by MTV and MySpace, at Coe College in Cedar Rapids. Of concern to Obama's campaign is where all these students will be Jan. 3, the date of the earliest Iowa caucus in history, which falls smack dab in the middle of winter break. Will they caucus or be on a beach somewhere enjoying the end of their winter break?

"Some people have said, 'Aw, you've got a lot of young people to support you,'" Obama responded this morning in Cedar Rapids. "I know this room is young, but I ve got a lot of people who aren't so young who are supporting me. So were not completely relied on the young vote."

Obama also suggested that having college students dispersed to their homes would be better for his campaign. "We actually want kids in Ames and kids in Iowa City, we want them to go home, we don't need to rack up some huge vote total in just concentrated areas we'd rather have focused all around."

Just in case, Obama is also talking about an issue of importance to older Iowans -- attacking rival Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., in townhall meetings and over the airwaves for not being honest about Social Security. Speaking to a gathered group of 100 in Iowa, Obama today said, "On issues as fundamental as how to protect Social Security, a candidate for president owes it to the American people to tell us where they stand."

Democratic Race to Upset Clinton Advantage

It's in Iowa where Obama and former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina have the best chance of upsetting the Clinton juggernaut.

While Clinton has commanding leads nationally and in New Hampshire in South Carolina, polls in Iowa have shown Clinton in a competitive three-way race. Clearly concerned, Clinton's campaign today held a job fair at her national headquarters to hire up to 100 staffers to send to Iowa.

"Nobody has come to a caucus yet, nobody has cast a vote yet, and I'm doing everything I can to earn the support of Iowans," Clinton said earlier this month.

Republican Mitt Romney is also pursuing this traditional path to the nomination -- pouring money and organization into Iowa and New Hampshire, where he leads his party. Today, he was endorsed by Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., who misidentified Romney's party. "If somebody'd said I was going to endorse a Democrat -- a Republican," Gregg said, catching himself with a laugh.

The Weight of Super Duper Tuesday

While the Republican front-runners signed their declarations of candidacy at the New Hampshire Statehouse today, both Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson are trying to blaze unconventional trails to the party's nomination, looking beyond Iowa and New Hampshire and focusing on South carolina and Florida

In Florida last week, Thompson called "a standpoint of practical politics ... right before we go into a Feb. 5 day. "I consider Florida my neck of the woods. I spent an awful lot of time in Florida as a Tennessee boy," Thompson said.

As for Super Duper Tuesday, it's an unusual addition to this election season, with more than 20 states holding primaries and almost 900 delegates up for grabs.

Thompson hopes to sweep the South, Giuliani big blue states like New York and California.

Giuliani did some fast math when asked by ABC News how important the Super Duper states were to him. "You can win three or four primaries and lose California, and you're behind two-to-one," Giuliani said. "Giuliani said, "If you run the last election, you're going to lose this one. You've got to figure this one out. The person who wins this is going to be the one who did the best job of figuring this new one out."

By Jake Tapper and Avery Miller, ABC News, October 29, 2007

There are three separate races making up the Election 2008 Presidential competition: the race for the Democratic nomination, the race for the Republican nomination, and the general election. All three share one unifying theme, Hillary Clinton.

Among Democrats, Clinton is more than a dominant frontrunner, she is the standard against which other candidates are measured. Barack Obama had a good start to the campaign season but he moved clearly into the top tier by beating Clinton in the first wave of fundraising reports. John Edwards was the party's Vice Presidential nominee but he earned top tier status by having the early season lead over Clinton in Iowa.

None of the other candidates were able to top Clinton in anything the chattering class considered important, so none of them moved into the top tier. Now that Clinton has equaled or surpassed Obama and Edwards in fundraising and Iowa, the two challengers are struggling. As we noted last week, the only bad numbers for Clinton are those on the calendar.

In the Republican race, the focus is on Clinton because opposing her may be the one thing virtually all factions of the Republican Party can agree upon. Being a political conservative today is defined almost as much by opposing Clinton as it is by opposing tax hikes or supporting conservative cultural views. For those seeking the Republican nomination, taking on Clinton has become an easy and straightforward way to identify with the concerns of base voters. Besides, the GOP candidates would much rather talk about Clinton than the current President of the United States .

But, in the general election, Clinton's role becomes even more significant. Election 2008 is the first time in more than half a century that a U.S. Presidential election has not included an incumbent or a Vice President seeking the top job. Clinton's candidacy may be filling that void and has assumed many dynamics typically associated with an incumbent. If this continues, the election could come down to a referendum on Hillary Clinton.

Most polling on general election match-ups involving Clinton look like a referendum rather than a choice between Clinton and a particular candidate. Using a three-poll rolling average to quiet any statistical noise, the Clinton effect becomes clear. The former First Lady earns between 46% and 49% of the vote against each of the top five Republican hopefuls. It doesn't matter if it's Rudy Giuliani or Mike Huckabee, John McCain or Fred Thompson.

If you average the results of the top five candidates, you find Clinton's support at 48%. She also attracts 48% support when matched up with the little known Ron Paul. Adding further support to the notion that it's all about Clinton is this tidbit-- among the voters who have never heard of Ron Paul or don't know enough to have an opinion, Clinton attracts the exact same total - 48%. These numbers make sense when you consider that Clinton is by far the best known of all the candidates and that opinions of her are split roughly down the middle.

For every attraction that Clinton holds for one segment of the population, there is an opposite reaction in some other segment. A review of recent Rasmussen Reports polling data found that Clinton might attract support from 18% of Republican women. But, 20% of Democratic men are likely to vote for a Republican if Clinton is the nominee.

Additionally while the Democratic frontrunner receives approximately 48% support no matter which Republican is included in the polls, 46% of voters say they will definitely vote against her no matter who the Republicans nominate. These numbers suggest that Republicans are on stronger political ground when talking about Hillary Clinton than when talking about the issues of Election 2008.

For the seven days ending October 28, 2007, Hillary Clinton earns 44% of the vote. Barack Obama is second at 20% followed by John Edwards at 14%. Bill Richardson attracts 4% while Dennis Kucinich is at 2% along with Joe Biden. Chris Dodd earns 1% and Mike Gravel is below that level while 12% of Likely Democratic Primary Voters are undecided .

The seven day results typically include interviews with more than 1,000 Likely Democratic Primary Voters. This includes both Democrats and those independents likely to vote in a Democratic Primary. In some state primaries, independent voters are allowed to participate in party primaries while in others they are excluded. The margin of sampling error for the weekly update is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

Updates prior to July 16 were based upon four days of polling conducted the Monday through Thursday preceding release.

Rasmussen Reports, October 29, 2007

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Traders on the Iowa Electronic Markets, which have been predicting U.S. elections with surprising accuracy for 20 years, are expecting a tight presidential vote next year, with the Democrat narrowly defeating the Republican.

And the most likely match-up? Hillary Clinton vs. Rudy Giuliani.

The non-profit market, run by professors at the University of Iowa in the key early voting state and allowed to operate since 1988 by special permission, is unique in the United States because it is the only one where investors put real money -- small amounts under $500 -- on the line.

It was started by the academics to see if markets, which are good at translating economic and financial information into a price, would be as good at synthesizing political information.

Joyce Berg, an accounting professor and member of the Iowa markets board, said the markets turned out to be better than national polls in predicting the final election results just days before the vote.

They scored even better against polls the farther away they were from the election.

"In just about 75 percent of the cases," Berg said, "the price in the market is closer to the actual outcome of the election than the polls were."

Though more than a year away, traders now are betting the November 2008 election will pit the two New York politicians against each other in the run for the presidency.

Recent trading gave Clinton, the senator and former first lady, a 70 percent chance of winning the Democratic nomination, versus a 16 percent chance for her closest challenger, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama.

Giuliani, the former New York City mayor, had a 40 percent shot at the Republican nomination, versus a 31.5 percent chance for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

Those figures are stronger than recent polling might suggest. Clinton's numbers have been 44 percent to 48 percent in most surveys; Giuliani's between 24 percent and 32 percent.

Traders predicted the Democratic candidate would ultimately win the election by about 4 percentage points.

RAPID GROWTH IN PREDICTION EXCHANGES

But Berg cautioned the numbers were constantly shifting as new information reached the market. Candidates can surge and plummet.

"It's not like you look in the magic crystal ball and you can see what's going to happen in the future," she said. "It's pulling together all the available information that's out there, saying ... this is what we think is going to happen."

The number of prediction exchanges has grown rapidly with the advent of the Internet.

Some offer contracts on politics and geopolitical events -- like whether the United States is likely to take military action against Iran -- while others project movie box office sales or the value of money-making ideas.

Industry growth prompted the leading players this month to create a trade group -- the Prediction Market Industry Association -- to promote their interests.

Intrade, the Dublin-based firm that claims to be the largest political prediction market, uses real money but also runs non-cash political exchanges for the Financial Times and the National Journal newspapers on the Internet.

Trading on its sites produced numbers similar to those from Iowa. Clinton is projected to have a 70 percent probability of winning the Democratic nomination, while Giuliani has a 44 percent chance of being the Republican candidate.

And the Democrat has a 62 percent chance of capturing the presidency, versus 36 percent for the Republican.

John Delaney, the chief executive of Intrade, said the similar results are a sign the markets are trading on the same information. "We are in a world of information overload and prediction markets can summarize, aggregate, distill a huge amount of thought, opinion and expert view into single probabilities," he said.

By David Alexander, ABC News, October 29, 2007

Undeclared voters likely to lean Democratic

Republican presidential candidates shouldn't look to New Hampshire's independent voters for a primary win, according to an informal survey of 30 undeclared voters.

Independent voters - those who have voted for both Democratic and Republican candidates in recent years - seem to be flocking to the Democratic primary. Anger over the continuing war in Iraq, frustration with government spending and the size of the deficit, and a sense of economic unease have driven many to the Democratic race, voters said.

Boscawen resident Roger Bergeron embodies the leftward drift. Since voting for Arizona Sen. John McCain in the 2000 Republican primary, Bergeron has soured on the party. "I don't have words enough to tell you how angry I am with Bush and his war," said Bergeron, who retired from the U.S. Air Force. As for McCain, who is attempting a second run for the Oval Office, "I will not vote for him now because he's aligned himself with Bush on Iraq."

Bergeron hasn't settled on a Democratic candidate. But "I can't in good conscience" vote for a Republican, he said. In New Hampshire, undeclared voters can vote in either party primary, giving them clout in both contests.

The movement of undeclared voters - those not affiliated with a political party - toward the Democratic race is borne out by data: In a recent University of New Hampshire Survey Center poll, two-thirds of undeclared voters said they planned to vote in the Democratic primary. If interviews with voters and polls are any indication, undeclared voters look set to play a bigger role in the upcoming Democratic primary, leaving the Republican primary to be decided in large part by registered Republicans.

That trend is a turnaround from the 2000 election when - with primaries competitive in both parties - nearly 62 percent of undeclared voters cast their ballots in the Republican primary. The interest of undeclared voters in that primary helped McCain widen his lead over George W. Bush, according to exit polls. "McCain is not really going to be able to do what he did in 2000, because those people are voting in the Democratic primary," said Andrew Smith, director of the UNH Survey Center.

The sheer size of the undeclared voting bloc makes its members subject to campaign wooing: As of last year's election, "undeclareds" made up nearly 44 percent of registered voters in the state.

But the New Hampshire independent's influence may be over-stated.

Although the cliche of the independent voter - the New Hampshire resident who takes the measure of each candidate before casting a ballot - has taken hold in popular imagination, the vast majority of undeclared voters are actually far from politically independent, Smith said. Based on his polling, Smith estimates that of current undeclared voters, 40 to 45 percent vote with Democrats, roughly 25 percent vote Republican and about 30 percent are true independents.

While the terms "independent" and "undeclared" are often used interchangeably, the words have disparate meanings, Smith said. "When we call them independents, we can't help but think of them as political free agents. But they're really not. They're just legally registered undeclared."

Interviews with undeclared voters turned up many who, in national races, vote solely for candidates of one political party. Among 30 undeclared voters, eight were closely aligned with the Democrat Party, compared with six for the Republican Party.

Clear movement

But the survey also exposed a clear trend: Nearly one-third of those polled have voted in recent years for Republican candidates, but now say they plan to cast their ballots for Democrats. Others remain undecided but expressed frustration with Bush's handling of the war and with what they described as the rightward shift of the Republican Party.

"I'm a pretty conservative person, generally speaking, but I find the Republican Party has moved so far away from me that I'm not comfortable anymore," said Marilyn Singer, a resident of Heritage Heights, a retirement community in Concord. Singer voted for Bush in the 2000 general election. But in 2004, she shifted, voting for Democratic presidential candidate Joe Lieberman in the primary and Kerry in the general election. Now, she feels torn. She considers McCain strong on foreign policy but too conservative on domestic issues. "I don't really know which way I'm going to jump," she said.

For others, the war in Iraq was the breaking point.

Rob Leigh, a retired Bow resident, was a longtime registered Republican; in the 2000 and 2004 general elections, he voted for Bush. But frustration with the ongoing war and concern about global warming prompted him to relinquish his party affiliation. Leigh, like many of the voters polled, said that he's leaning toward Democrat Barack Obama, a first-term U.S. senator from Illinois. To Leigh, Obama's relatively short Washington tenure is part of his appeal. "He's not of the establishment. He hasn't been there long enough to be completely corrupted," said Leigh, who attended Obama's speech in front of the State House last week.

"This time, it will undoubtedly be a Democrat," Milton Chapman of Bow said of his presidential primary choice. After voting for Bush in 2000, Chapman - who retired from a career in broadcasting - turned to Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry in 2004. His decision is rooted in the war in Iraq: "I think it's just draining our resources, and I think that we've just created more and more problems the longer we're there," he said. "I think it's been run right from the start by incompetent people."

For McCain, the war may be particularly damaging. Several voters who supported McCain in 2000 said they had ruled him out due to his continuing support for the war. "If John McCain would change his views on the Iraq war, I'd probably vote for him in a heartbeat," said David Hart of Boscawen.

Government spending and the current size of the deficit turned Kent Ruesswick, who voted for McCain in 2000, off the Republican Party. "Where's the fiscal responsibility here?" asked Ruesswick, who runs a Shaker design and building business in Canterbury. Bush's attitude toward Congress - and what Ruesswick described as the unwillingness of some administration officials to answer congressional queries - has also been a turnoff, he said: "There are three branches of government."

Among those voters polled who are true independents - meaning those who don't vote regularly with one party - Obama was frequently cited. They pointed to his criticism of lobbyists, his brief time in Washington, the feeling that, as Mark Hiatt of Northwood put it, "he sounds like an honest guy." But although voters expressed support for Obama, many said that they haven't completely decided how to vote.

"He seems to be the least political of all of them," said Bob Carels, a resident of the Havenwood retirement community in Concord who previously worked with computers. He's "not necessarily entrenched and beholden."

Obama has made a concerted effort to appeal to swing voters, describing himself as an agent of change, capable of transforming the ways of Washington. Despite his efforts, he has lagged behind Democrat Hillary Clinton in state opinion polls.

Frustration abounds

Other voters continue to look at both Republican and Democratic candidates. But frustration with Bush's leadership abounds.

"I'm really disappointed in our current president and party," said Steve Homer, an engineer from Epsom. "It seems they've forgotten about people back home, putting all the money into the war." Among the Republican candidates, Homer is partial to former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson, whom Homer described as "authoritative." On the Democratic side, Homer is drawn to former North Carolina senator John Edwards: "He seems down to earth."

Robert Todd, a resident of the Havenwood retirement community, has met several of the Republican candidates, and he came away excited by former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee ("The guy who had the best pitch, if you will, was Huckabee," Todd said).

But Todd is also impressed with Clinton: "She has the potential, with having been in the White House, to get a good staff." If the general election turns into a contest between McCain and Clinton, Todd said, he'd likely vote for McCain, in large part due to his years of experience. But if Clinton faced former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, Todd would likely side with Clinton.

Several voters who consistently vote for Democrats plan to support Clinton. "I've never been so worried and so concerned and so scared as I have in the last few years," said Laura Rizzi, a former nurse from Washington, New Hampshire, who said she became permanently disabled several years ago. "We can't do anything until we get balance back in the middle class."

Rizzi supported McCain in the 2000 primary but went with the Democratic Party in that year's general election. "I don't know what I can do to rebuild the middle class except vote for her," Rizzi said, referring to Clinton.

Of the undeclared voters who tend to vote Republican, several expressed interest in Thompson, McCain, former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani and Romney. "We should finish the job, and give our troops everything they need to fight this war," said Robert Farrell of Boscawen, who favors Giuliani and Romney.

Number crunching

The number of undeclared voters casting ballots in each primary varies from year to year and depends in part on the level of competition in each contest. In 2004, for example, with President Bush running for re-election, few undeclared voters turned out for the Republican primary: 7,702 undeclared voters cast ballots in the Republican contest, while 95,634 voted in the Democratic primary, according to the secretary of state's office.

In 2000, both races were contested. At the time, Vice President Al Gore faced challenger Bill Bradley in the Democratic race, while McCain, Bush and others tussled on the Republican side. More than 111,000 undeclared voters showed up at the polls for those primaries; nearly 62 percent of them cast ballots in the Republican primary. 1992 was another big year for undeclared voters, with many swinging toward the Democratic primary, Smith said.

In recent years, the number of undeclared voters has increased. Last year, there were more than 370,000 undeclared voters in the state, compared with roughly 270,000 in 2004, according to data from the secretary of state's office. In 2004, those not affiliated with a political party made up about 38 percent of all registered voters.

Same-day voter registration has pushed the increase, Smith said. Many undeclared voters are new to the state and haven't registered with a political party, he added. Others simply aren't as engaged with politics as those who are registered with a political party: Undeclared voters turn out to vote far less than registered Republicans and Democrats, he said.

"The thing about the people who are really independents," Smith said: "They're not that likely to vote."

By Sarah Liebowitz, Concord Monitor, October 28, 2007

The candidate filing period for the 2008 New Hampshire presidential primaries ends on Friday, Nov. 2. We may not know for a few weeks yet the exact date when voters will take to the polls, but we are fairly certain we have entered the final 10 weeks of the most intense primary campaigning we have ever seen.

You don't have to drive far, if at all, to see them. For example, Republican presidential hopefuls John McCain and Mitt Romney along with Democrats Barack Obama and Bill Richardson were in our neighborhood this past week. Democratic hopefuls John Edwards and Hillary Clinton and candidates from both parties are expected to be in the region this coming week.

And this constant parade of Republican and Democratic candidates will only become more intense as a majority of voters will finally start paying closer attention to those seeking to succeed President Bush in January 2009.

The intense pace of this longest of primary seasons has been matched as well by a sustained challenge on the part of other states (such as Michigan) to compress the primary calendar and even replace Iowa and New Hampshire as the first states to caucus and cast votes.

The New Hampshire primary has played an important and very public role in the process since 1952. Some primaries have been more eventful than others, but Granite State residents have taken their roles seriously in vetting candidate and policies for the rest of the country.

We don't know how the 2012 primary calendar will unfold, but if for some reason the state's first-in-the-nation status is lessened, this could be a final chance for citizens in the state to make a statement to the rest of the country.

It's often taken too much for granted, but voters here get an opportunity to meet and test presidential candidates firsthand - in essence to represent themselves and those who don't have access to swarms of high-paid lobbyists in Washington, D.C., where face time with decision makers is treated like a commodity billed by the hour.

While candidates work hard to stay on message and to sell their policies as the next best thing, citizens here have the chance to challenge these messages and policies.

Or to raise questions about daily headlines. Rarely, if ever, have citizens had a chance to confront lawmakers about as serious a foreign policy issue as a potential military conflict with Iran.

Or we can talk to candidates of both parties about their plans for the war in Iraq or Guantanamo Bay. How will they confront the growth of an increasingly complex network of terrorist threats? Where do they stand on the growth of children's health insurance legislation and the larger question of health care reform? What do they think about polar ice caps melting at an alarming rate and the larger dilemma of global climate change?

And these are just the top of the pyramid of serious issues facing the next president whether he or she be a Democrat or Republican.

These are life-and-death, bread-and-butter issues that have serious consequences for our region, the country, and the world. But then New Hampshire, one of the country's 13 original states, has always had a sense of both the theatrical and the historically vital. Let's show the nation and the world again we know one from the other by pushing the candidates to step outside their comfort zones and react to the realities, concerns and confusions faced by Granite Staters and all Americans.

Sea Coast, October 28, 2007

LAKE BUENA VISTA, Florida (Reuters) - The Democratic Party's convention in Florida during the weekend was like a rock concert performed solely by warm-up bands.

"This would be the least exciting (convention) in 30 years, the least encouraging," said a noticeably deflated, long-time Democratic conventioneer Alice Long Owens of St. Augustine, Florida.

Despite Florida's role as a major battleground in U.S. presidential elections -- President George W. Bush ended up in the White House in 2000 after taking the state by a handful of disputed votes -- Democratic stars like Sens. Hillary Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois were no-shows.

All the leading Democratic presidential candidates followed orders from the Democratic National Committee to boycott the 3-day convention at the Walt Disney World resorts, and public campaigning in the state in general, as punishment for Florida's move to hold its presidential primary early.

Instead of getting pumped up by Clinton and Obama, the Florida Democrats politely applauded keynote speeches by U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida and House of Representatives Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland.

"It put a real damper on it," said Owens.

The Democratic National Committee has said Florida's delegates will not be seated at the 2008 national Democratic convention in Denver because the state's primary, brought forward to January 29, violates party rules against holding the balloting before February 5.

Iowa and New Hampshire are exceptions to the rule and South Carolina and Nevada have also been given a green light to hold early primaries.

Nelson, along with Florida Democratic Rep. Alcee Hastings, has sued the Democratic National Committee, saying the party boycott denies Floridians the right to have their votes counted in the selection of the nominee in the November 2008 election.

In a speech, Nelson said the national primary election system needed to be revamped, but he suggested the 2008 presidential election controversy would be resolved by allowing the states permitted by the committee to hold early primaries to skip ahead of Florida.

Nelson also said Florida, the country's fourth most populous state, ultimately would not be hurt.

"The state will not suffer because we are going to get the candidates here," Nelson said on Friday. Nelson did not elaborate, other than to announce a news conference at his Orlando office on Monday.

By Barbara Liston, Reuters, October 28, 2007

Sen. Clinton Touted by Husband at Harlem Rally As Best Democrat for His Old Job

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton was hailed by her husband Saturday as the best Democratic choice for the White House at a rally just uptown from his Harlem office where they were greeted by the sweet sounds of the Abyssinian Baptist Church choir and the handclaps of its congregation.

"I would be campaigning for Hillary even if I was not married to her," former President Clinton said from the altar of the historic church on West 138th Street. "I believe she is the best qualified, best suited non-incumbent ever."

The Clintons appeared before the near-capacity crowd with the senator walking out first, followed by her husband. The church echoed with cheers as Bill Clinton saluted the crowd, which responded with chants of "Hillary! Hillary!"

The choir sang "Victory Is Mine" as the couple clapped along with their supporters.

After she was introduced by her husband, Sen. Clinton told the crowd it was time to return America "on the path to goodness and greatness again." She attacked the Bush administration for marginalizing the middle class, children and other groups.

"We're going to make it clear there are no invisible people in America," the senator said.

The rally in the city's most famous black neighborhood was another indication of the battle between Clinton and Barack Obama for the black vote in the Democratic primary. Last month in California, Clinton appeared in Watts and at a Beverly Hill fundraiser with hoops star Earvin "Magic" Johnson.

Obama's name received a loud cheer from the audience when he was mentioned by Bronx Borough President Adolfo Carrion. The latest AP-Ipsos poll shows Clinton leading Obama, her closest rival, 46 percent to 25 percent.

As evidenced at the Harlem rally, Sen. Clinton benefits from the strong relationship her husband has enjoyed for years with black voters. Bill Clinton was cheered for mentioning that the couple had just celebrated their 32nd wedding anniversary, and he joined them in singing "Happy Birthday" to his wife, who just turned 60.

Clinton supporters lined up in a driving rain to get inside the church, where they were joined by virtually all the city's top Democrats, from Congressional delegation dean Rep. Charles Rangel to City Council speaker Christine Quinn.

Rangel was credited by Sen. Clinton as the first person to encourage her run for the Senate, and by Bill Clinton for lining up his office space on 125th Street. He told the crowd they had a chance to change America by putting New York's junior senator in the White House.

"I want the old people like me to remember, and the young people to say, 'I think I was there,'" Rangel said. "We are making history."

By Larry McShane, Associated Press, October 27, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Hillary Rodham Clinton remains the frontrunner in the national race for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination in the United States, according to a poll by Bloomberg and the Los Angeles Times. 48 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in a 2008 primary.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 17 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 13 per cent. Support is lower for Delaware senator Joe Biden, New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, and Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich.

Yesterday, Edwards presented his corporate responsibility proposals and vowed to help middle-class workers, saying, "The statistics say our economy is growing, but the truth is, it's only growing at the top. Instead of protecting the compact of equal opportunity and shared prosperity, Washington protects corporate profits and hoards prosperity."

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, October 27, 2007

MANCHESTER, N.H. -- Quietly but systematically, Hillary Clinton is building a firewall in New Hampshire. She can afford to lose the Iowa caucuses as long as she can win here. She can't afford to lose both states.

As a result, say Democrats with long experience in state politics, Clinton has been doing everything "the New Hampshire way." She has carefully cultivated strong personal ties that go back to her husband's 1992 campaign and has built an organization with deep local roots. Although a victory by Barack Obama in Iowa could still propel him to triumph here, Clinton is setting herself up to withstand an Obama surge by using New Hampshire to become, if necessary, the second Comeback Kid.

The latest poll of likely Democratic primary voters, released yesterday by the New Hampshire Institute of Politics at Saint Anselm College, found Clinton with a commanding 42.6 percent support. Obama had 21.5 percent and John Edwards13.9 percent.

Clinton's advantage reflects the difficulties Obama has had in turning the enthusiasm he created in the early days of his campaign into enduring support. "Barack seems flat," said Arnie Arnesen, a former Democratic candidate for governor who is now a broadcaster and commentator. "The magic we experienced in December hasn't been sustained."

Obama's rock-star quality may actually be getting in his way. Gray Chynoweth, a lawyer who is president of the state's Young Democrats -- and is, like Arnesen, neutral in the contest -- said he admires Obama and was "excited to be part of his first visit to the state."

But Chynoweth adds: "There's a risk -- partly because he's always surrounded by Secret Service guys -- that some people feel that Obama might think of himself as too cool for school." But Secret Service protection, which Clinton also gets, is only part of Obama's problem. The large crowds Obama draws hinder his ability to engage in traditional campaigning. "People here don't just expect you to be on the stage," Chynoweth said. "They expect you to be out in the audience among the people."

Obama's charisma causes him other problems. Arnesen said that while Clinton's message "is very much about the voters," Obama's is "very much about himself" and his personal capacity to create change.

Cinde Warmington, who chairs the Democratic Party in the town of Gilford and supports Chriss Dodd, said she likes Obama but was struck by a speech given by Michelle Obama declaring that her husband "really is special." This positive attribute, Warmington said, can also "come across as a sense of detachment," or even what some here perceive as an above-the-fray superiority.

Chynoweth said Obama tries hard to fight this perception. "He always says that 'I'm just a vehicle for this message,' " Chynoweth said. "But in a weird way, when he's saying it's not about him, that makes people think it's still about him. It's a tough box to be in."

Jim Demers, who co-chairs Obama's campaign here, believes that Obama will perform far better in the New Hampshire primary than current polling suggests because of his appeal to independents -- they are called "undeclared" here -- who can vote in either party's contest. And he notes that Obama has campaigned intensively in small groups, particularly at the house parties for which New Hampshire is famous.

But Demers points to a fascinating dynamic that -- although he doesn't say so -- may also be helping Clinton. Obama's candidacy, he argues, "sucked the energy out of the rest of the pack," hurting Edwards and others who might have emerged as major challengers to Clinton. Thus, instead of a campaign organized in opposition to Clinton, the fascination with Obama has, up to now, made her less of a target.

And Ray Buckley, the state Democratic chairman who is being so studiously neutral that he says he'll write in Jimmy Carter's name on primary day, argued that the strong reception Obama received here in December pushed Clinton "to get in much earlier" and organize the state more intensively. Several Democrats also said Clinton's claim that she can deal with the Republican "attack machine" rings truer to an angry party than Obama's call for an end to partisan polarization -- the very appeal Demers hopes will eventually draw independents to Obama.

The paradox for Obama is that catching up may require him to make Clinton -- and her views and electability -- more of an issue than he is. It may not come naturally, but "No More Mr. Nice Guy" may have to become his campaign anthem.

By E.J. Dionne Jr., The Washington Post, October 26, 2007

Celebrating her 60th birthday last night with a fund-raiser that netted $1.5 million, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton took a rare shot at an old New York rival and current Republican presidential candidate, Rudolph W. Giuliani, for saying he would root for the Red Sox in the World Series.

Mr. Giuliani, a Yankees fan, has mocked Mrs. Clinton over the years for professing allegiance to the Yankees, even though she grew up a Chicago Cubs fan and recently said she would split her loyalty between those teams if they met in the World Series.

But Mrs. Clinton smiled widely last night as she got in her dig at Mr. Giuliani, the former New York City mayor. After the Yankees lost in the first round of the playoffs this month, Mr. Giuliani said he would rally behind the archrival Red Sox - an endorsement seen in some quarters as pandering to New Hampshire primary voters in Red Sox Nation.

Addressing a packed Beacon Theater on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, Mrs. Clinton noted that both she and the evening's M.C., Billy Crystal, were devoted to the Yankees.

"I have been a fan, and I remain a fan of the New York Yankees - no changes, no looking to curry favor with anyone else," she said to much laughter and applause from the audience of mostly New York Democrats.

Less directly, Mrs. Clinton also noted that she was "so proud" to campaign around the country and talk about "New York and New Yorkers and what New York means to me." At his campaign events, Mr. Giuliani can sound critical of New York, either describing the problems he dealt with as mayor or the liberal bent of many of the voters.

Mrs. Clinton, a leading candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, and Mr. Giuliani, a leading Republican candidate, nearly faced each other in the New York Senate race in 2000. Mr. Giuliani dropped out, however, facing a prostate cancer diagnosis and troubles in his personal life, and Mrs. Clinton went on to victory.

Mrs. Clinton, whose birthday is today, celebrated with a concert featuring Elvis Castello and the Wallflowers. Former President Bill Clinton introduced her to the audience; the couple mostly delivered their typical campaign remarks.

At one point, Mr. Costello drew applause for defending the notion of questioning authority as an act of patriotism.

At the end, he led the audience in serenading Mrs. Clinton with "Happy Birthday" - inserting "Mrs. President" in place of her name.

By Patrick Healy, The New York Times, October 26, 2007

NEW YORK - Democratic hopeful Hillary Clinton is at the top of voters' minds. More people are familiar with Clinton and her positions on the issues than any other candidate, she is the most mentioned when people are asked who they would want in the White House in the event of a national crisis and she is also the candidate seen as having the most passion and enthusiasm to be president.

In addition, Clinton and Rudy Giuliani maintain their front-runner status, and both are seen as the best spokesperson for their respective parties.

In the Democratic contest, Clinton has a 17-percentage point advantage over Obama, leading 42 percent to 25 percent; Edwards comes in third with 13 percent. Earlier in the month, Clinton had a 32-point edge over Obama (Oct. 9-10); the current results are more in line with where the race stood last month when Clinton was up by 19 points (Sept. 11-12).

"All the talk of Clinton's 'inevitability' over the past few weeks may have pushed some Democrats away," comments Opinion Dynamics CEO John Gorman. "With the first voting still more than two months away, voters want to have a say in the choice. They may end up voting for Clinton, but they don't like hearing that she's already won."

The top three candidates remain the same on Republican side: Giuliani leads with 31 percent, followed by Fred Thompson at 17 percent and John McCain at 12 percent. Mitt Romney is currently at 7 percent and Mike Huckabee who captures 5 percent.

"The Huckabee 'boomlet' is still small," comments Gorman. "But is significant that he is statistically tied with Romney who has spent oceans of money - much of it from his personal fortune - and doesn't seem to be getting much traction."

The national telephone poll was conducted for FOX News by Opinion Dynamics Corp. among 900 registered voters from Oct. 23-24. The poll has a 3-point error margin.

The candidates have been sparring about which one best speaks for their party, spurred, at least in part, by Romney's recent comment that his experience and values represented the "Republican wing of the Republican Party." What do Republicans think? They say Giuliani (24 percent), McCain (18 percent) and Thompson (12 percent) are the top three candidates who speak "most clearly" for what their party believes, although 25 percent of Republicans are unsure. Romney (8 percent) comes in fourth ahead of Mike Huckabee (6 percent).

For Democrats, 43 percent Clinton best represents their party -- more than twice as many as think one of the other candidates does; one of five Democrats says Obama (20 percent) speaks most clearly for the party, followed by Edwards with 11 percent.

Fire in the Belly

More people think Clinton (35 percent) has "the most passion and enthusiasm for wanting to be president" than any other candidate from either party; she's followed by Obama (18 percent) and Giuliani comes in third (10 percent). No other candidate receives mentions in the double digits.

Among Democrats, more see Clinton as having fire in the belly, as 44 percent say they think she has the most passion to be president, which is nearly twice as many as think Obama does (24 percent). Republicans also think Clinton (28 percent) has the most enthusiasm for the presidency, followed by Giuliani (18 percent) and then Obama (10 percent).

Handling a Crisis

If the United States were in a crisis, a 23 percent plurality of voters say they would want Clinton in the White House, followed by Giuliani at 19 percent, McCain at 11 percent and Obama at 9 percent.

Not surprisingly, Democrats are most likely to pick their front-runner and say they would want Clinton as president and Republicans are equally likely to pick their front-runner Giuliani. What about swing voters? Among self-described independents, 22 percent would want Clinton in the White House, 17 percent McCain and 12 percent Giuliani.

Candidate Attributes

In the upcoming presidential election, voters say the top attributes in deciding their vote will be for the candidate to be "a strong leader" (24 percent), someone who "can bring about change" (22 percent) and someone who "shares my values" (11 percent).

For Republicans, voting for a strong leader (26 percent) is the most important trait, although several other qualities are also important in making a selection, including for the candidate to "share my values" (15 percent), "be personally moral" (15 percent), have "clear stands on the issues" (13 percent) and have the ability to "bring about change" (12 percent).

The priorities for Democrats are slightly different: "can bring about change" (25 percent) is first, narrowly edging "strong leader" (24 percent). These are followed by followed by "shares my values" (10 percent) and "has the right experience" (9 percent).

By Dana Blanton, FOX News, October 26, 2007

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Barack Obama, struggling to gain ground on rival Hillary Clinton in the 2008 White House race, faces a delicate dilemma in trying to bring down the Democratic front-runner without spoiling his upbeat image.

After launching his campaign with a burst of excitement, the first-term Illinois senator is mired more than 20 points behind Clinton in national polls and trails by smaller margins in the early voting states of Iowa and New Hampshire barely two months before the first contests.

While that is plenty of time to turn around the race, Obama's promise of a new style of consensus-building politics has raised questions about how hard-nosed he will be -- or can afford to be -- in confronting Clinton. "The campaign has to develop a level of aggressiveness and intensity that I'm not sure we've seen yet. If he's playing to win, they are going to have to ratchet it up," said Simon Rosenberg, head of the Democratic advocacy group NDN.

But an approach that is too harsh could dilute his message, alienate his newest converts and harm a potentially bright future in the Democratic Party at the age of 46, analysts said.

"Obama is in a tough spot. He has to be very careful about how he handles himself from here on forward," said Democratic consultant Dane Strother. "He can't turn himself into just another politician. His entire attraction is that he is different."

Obama has stepped up his criticism of Clinton in the last few weeks, more directly questioning the New York senator's 2002 vote to authorize war in Iraq and comparing it to his early opposition to the conflict. Along with many of the other contenders to be the Democratic nominee in the November 2008 election, he also criticized her recent vote endorsing the possible labeling of an Iranian military force as a terrorist group. "We're going to make clear what the policy differences are between us and Hillary Clinton. Voters expect that and Democrats deserve that," Obama spokesman Bill Burton said.

NO MORE 'SLASH-AND-BURN'

"We don't think Americans are looking for slash-and-burn politics and the same old divisiveness," Burton said. "Barack Obama has set a higher standard for this campaign and we consider that to be refreshing to voters, not a liability."

Obama, who would be the first black president in U.S. history, has stirred enthusiasm among grass-roots Democratic activists. He leads the primary fund-raising chase and attracts big crowds on the campaign trail even as he slips farther behind establishment favorite Clinton in national polls.

Part of his problem, analysts say, has been the high expectations and heavy publicity he has generated since he excited Democrats with his keynote speech at the 2004 nominating convention. "In many ways he is running an insurgent campaign, but he was very big, very quickly. Most insurgent campaigns take longer to grow," said Dante Scala, a political analyst at the University of New Hampshire. "Voters here like a scrappy underdog, and he never fit that role."

Obama's campaign dismisses the national polls as exercises in name recognition, pointing out Obama, Clinton and rival John Edwards are in a tight three-way race in Iowa, where an early win can immediately change the dynamics of the race. "I don't think he needs to differentiate himself from Clinton any more, although he certainly can on things like the Iraq war vote," said Gordon Fischer, former chairman of the Iowa Democratic Party and an Obama supporter.

What Obama needs to do now, he said, is "organize, organize, organize. Iowa is a three-way scramble right now, and Obama's strength is going to be his organization."

Edwards, who finished second to John Kerry in the 2004 Iowa presidential contest before becoming his vice presidential running mate, has been far more aggressive in attacking Clinton on the campaign trail.

"Obama can allow Edwards and the rest to take Hillary on. He doesn't have to carry the load," Strother said. "He has the freedom to stay above the fray."

By John Whitesides, Reuters, October 26, 2007

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton still holds a 2-1 lead in support over her nearest rival, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, in California - where all the top-tier Democrats would defeat the leading Republican candidates in head-to-head matchups if the election were held now, a Field Poll to be released Friday shows.

Clinton, D-N.Y., leads the Democratic pack with 45 percent support among California's Democratic likely primary voters, followed by Obama with 20 percent and former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards with 11 percent. That is a similar spread from the last Field Poll in August, which showed Clinton at 49 percent, Obama at 19 percent and Edwards at 10 percent.

With three months until the state's Feb. 5 primary, the poll illustrates a stable Democratic contest in California - in contrast to the Republican side, where the top four candidates are bunched much more closely together.

When matched head to head, the top Democratic candidates - Clinton, Obama and Edwards - all have substantial leads over the first-tier GOP candidates: former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson and Arizona Sen. John McCain, the poll shows.

Clinton, for example, leads Giuliani 52-38 percent; Obama leads Giuliani 51-35 percent, and Edwards leads Giuliani 46-40 percent, the poll shows.

Clinton's front-runner status is cemented by her lead among likely Democratic voters in every region of California, among men and women, in every age and ethnic group, among union and nonunion households, and among all income groups, the poll shows.

The Field Poll also shows that she holds a 20-percentage-point lead over Obama among liberal voters, a 32-point lead among moderates, and a 15-point lead over Obama among conservative Democrats.

Clinton even holds a significant advantage over former Vice President Al Gore, who has been urged to enter the race in the wake of his selection as a Nobel Peace Prize winner for his work to fight global warming. The poll shows Clinton favored by 35 percent of California likely Democratic voters to 22 percent for Gore. That was a wider gap than in March, when Clinton was at 31 percent and Gore was at 25 percent, the poll shows.

The poll was taken Oct. 11-21 with 1,201 registered voters, including 533 Democrats - 434 of them considered likely to vote in the California primary. The margin of error is plus or minus 4.8 percentage points among likely Democratic voters.

THE RACE: The presidential race for Democrats, Republicans in Maryland.

___

THE NUMBERS - DEMOCRATS

Hillary Rodham Clinton, 48 percent

Barack Obama, 29 percent

John Edwards, 8 percent.

No other candidate received more than 3 percent.

___

THE NUMBERS - REPUBLICANS

Rudy Giuliani, 39 percent

John McCain, 18 percent

Fred Thompson, 14 percent

Mitt Romney 10 percent

No other candidate received more than 4 percent

___

OF INTEREST:

Clinton's lead over Obama has narrowed in Maryland since a Washington Post-ABC News national poll conducted late last month. In that poll, Clinton led Obama 53 percent to 20 percent. Maryland's presidential primaries are scheduled for Feb. 12, by which time many analysts expect candidates from both parties to have secured the nomination.

___

The Washington Post poll was conducted by telephone Oct. 18 through 22 among a random sample of 1,103 Maryland adults. The results from the full poll have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

Associated Press, October 26, 2007

WASHINGTON, Oct. 24 - Hillary Rodham Clinton needs her rest. She shuns the nocturnal habits of her husband - the 2 a.m. staff calls, the all-hours games of hearts. "It doesn't suit my body rhythms," said Mrs. Clinton, who typically sleeps six or seven hours, sometimes beside the briefing book she had been reading.

Her meetings have clear agendas and rarely devolve into open-ended "brainstorming" sessions. She might indulge gossip at the outset (Who's pregnant? Who saw "Grey's Anatomy"?) but hates wasting time. "Every meeting should be transactional," said Tamera Luzzatto, Mrs. Clinton's Senate chief of staff.

So should each e-mail message. Mrs. Clinton's are spare ("yes, let's do it."), uncluttered with jokes, emoticons or out-of-nowhere "whassups." She carries a BlackBerry, on vibrate, in her purse.

When asked about her as a manager, people who have worked for Mrs. Clinton, the Democratic senator from New York, described her as "organized," "methodical" and "disciplined." They also note that those words were never applied to her husband, Bill Clinton.

"She is very smart and very organized," said Leon E. Panetta, the former White House chief of staff. "Bill Clinton was very smart and not very organized."

It is indeed likely that a Hillary Clinton White House would be more punctual, precise and process-oriented than her husband's. Still, managing something as big as the federal government and unforeseeable as a presidency presents an inevitably steep learning curve.

Mrs. Clinton has never led a large enterprise, a point her Republican rival Rudolph W. Giuliani has made in recent days. She has overseen a Senate office (staff of 55), a first lady's office (staff of 25), an ill-fated "health-care task force" ( involving 511 people), a presidential campaign (staff of more than 500) - and attended many, many meetings ("I've decided to declare meetings as my major," Mrs. Clinton wrote jokingly in a letter in her college days).

Her background as a boss, powerful spouse and advocate could signal Mrs. Clinton's approach to the job for which she is now applying. She is credited with hiring capable, loyal staff members, though her top aides have also been called insular and needlessly defensive at times. Friends and advisers say Mrs. Clinton has been a diligent student of her own mistakes, and her style has evolved over the years from a tendency to micromanage to a greater willingness to delegate; from a bent toward perfectionism to one closer to pragmatism; from a go-for-broke mentality to one more willing to compromise.

Mrs. Clinton, for her part, draws a distinction between leadership and management, and her style and that of Mr. Clinton.

"My husband has extraordinary leadership ability," Mrs. Clinton said in an interview. "But he was also not as interested in the day-to-day management. He was much more focused on our goals and objectives: how you do the politics, how you do the persuasion. I'm trying to meld leadership and management in a way that really suits me."

For much of her career, Mrs. Clinton served in largely advisory or collaborative management roles - as a law firm partner, as chairwoman of the board at the nonprofit Children's Defense Fund and as a director of three public corporations. As a first lady, she was a trouble-shooter for her husband.

From the start of her professional life, she was regarded as an intense listener and stickler for accountability. While serving as a field coordinator in Indiana for Jimmy Carter's presidential campaign in 1976, she met with some men leading the get-out-the-vote operation and pressed them for specifics about how many phone calls they would make and how many cars they had secured for Election Day. As Mrs. Clinton kept grilling them, one man reached across the table, grabbed her by the turtleneck and told her to shut up.

"First, don't ever touch me again," Mrs. Clinton told him, as she recalled the incident in her memoir, "Living History" (Simon & Schuster, 2003). "Second, if you were as fast with your answers to my questions as you are with your hands, I'd have the information I need to do my job." And she walked out.

That penchant for bluntness, insistence on data and impatience with evasiveness have endured through the years.

In the White House, Mrs. Clinton often sat silently for long stretches during strategy sessions that could spiral into long-winded free-for-alls. She would grind her elbows into the table, then let fly.

"If she felt a discussion was being organized in a haphazard way, she would not hesitate to challenge the process and say, 'What are we doing here?'" Mr. Panetta said.

"Fail to plan, plan to fail" is a favorite platitude of Mrs. Clinton.

Few things irk her more than a poorly run meeting. When discussions meander, her advisers have come to expect to see her mouth curl into a slight but discernible smirk, her head bob impatiently and her shoulders stiffen.

While Mrs. Clinton is quick to distribute compliments for a good job (or "great outfit!"), her feedback can also be instant, direct and withering. Melanne Verveer, Mrs. Clinton's chief of staff in the White House, recalls her poring through the draft of a speech, peering up and telling the speechwriter, "I know somewhere in this masterpiece is the kernel of a speech."

While her husband's expressions of temper could be volcanic and short-lived, Mrs. Clinton's are more controlled and lasting. "It tends to be a little more simmering with her," Mr. Panetta said. She is not averse to firing people, although the list of people she has directly told to leave is short.

"She tends to marginalize, not fire," said David R. Gergen, a former adviser to Mr. Clinton. "She is more likely to shun to the periphery."

One person who did not get the message - or ignored it - was Representative Rahm Emmanuel, the Illinois Democrat who served in several prominent roles in the Clinton White House. Early on, Mrs. Clinton had doubts about several young aides, including George Stephanopoulos and Dee Dee Myers, the press secretary, because she thought "the kids" lacked the experience and gravitas their workplace demanded.

She was particularly suspicious of the brash Mr. Emanuel. According to a high-level official in the Clinton White House, Mrs. Clinton instructed Thomas F. McLarty 3rd, the chief of staff, to fire him. But Mr. Emanuel insisted he was not leaving unless Bill Clinton himself told him to go. The president never did, and Mrs. Clinton did not press the issue.

"The worst thing you can do when you work for Hillary Clinton is sit there and nod yes," Mr. Emanuel said.

When Mrs. Clinton was first lady, her ill-fated effort to overhaul the nation's health care system was clearly a political defeat, but it also involved management missteps for which she drew wide criticism.

"There was a level of perfectionism there," said John B. Breaux, a former senator from Louisiana.

Determined to create a comprehensive "process," Mrs. Clinton allowed the project to become unwieldy - convening a "task force" that included 412 government employees, 82 "special" or temporary staff members and 17 consultants who helped produce a 1,342-page document.

Mrs. Clinton concedes she made numerous mistakes in the effort.

"I'm very interested in how you reach and implement decisions in a very efficient way," she said. "Certainly, there was a lot of pressure on us to do things that, now in retrospect, I don't think were in the best interests of the overall plan."

Over the years, Mrs. Clinton has won a reputation as a good boss. She is diligent about remembering birthdays and doing things like calling her Senate scheduler, Lona Valmoro, to offer condolences after her dachshund, Largo, was run over by a car.

Mrs. Clinton has also become more willing to delegate responsibility. "I'm not second-guessing the people I entrust to manage because I think I make good decisions on personnel," she said.

In return, Mrs. Clinton has won the loyalty of her Senate and campaign staffs, a point underscored by the rarity of leaks and absence of kiss-and-tell memoirs from her camp. Of the seven participants in the Clinton campaign's 7:30 a.m. conference call, most go back at least a decade with her. Mrs. Clinton's campaign manager, Patti Solis Doyle, began working as her scheduler in Little Rock, Ark., during Mr. Clinton's first campaign for the presidency. Only one of the group - Mike Henry, deputy campaign manager - is a relative newcomer.

Mrs. Clinton's orbit is known by the now-cliched moniker "Hillaryland," suggesting a carefree atmosphere. In fact, she presides over an office of intense and focused workaholics, protective of their patron and wary of outsiders, a trait that has drawn comparisons to the leadership team of George W. Bush. The president surrounded himself with advisers who went back to his Texas days and were similarly lauded for loyalty and criticized for insularity.

"The Clinton campaign seems to be dominated by the same old people," said William Mayer, a Northeastern University professor who is an expert on presidential campaigns.

Having a tight inner circle can cut both ways, Professor Mayer said. With Mr. Bush, he said, "it looked fine to have this group of loyal Texans in there, until his approval ratings went under 40 percent and there were no fresh eyes to see the mistakes."

Mrs. Clinton, not surprisingly, bristles at such comparisons. She contrasts what she calls the "echo chamber" around the president with her own willingness to expand her own circle, hear disputes and solicit opposing views.

The people who thrive within Mrs. Clinton's "process" are those who best provide the currency of choices. "She wants to know, 'O.K., what are my options here?'" Ms. Solis Doyle said. "She wants a Plan A, a Plan B and a Plan C. She wants recommendations. Then she'll make a decision." She and Mrs. Clinton speak two, three or four times a day, in a kind of shorthand.

Ms. Solis Doyle said she knew intuitively which items required the senator's attention. When news surfaced of the criminal record of Norman Hsu, a Democratic fund-raiser, Mrs. Clinton's advisers suggested a range of responses, including defending him, keeping the money he had raised for her campaign, or returning it.

In the end, Mrs. Clinton decided to refund $850,000 in contributions linked to Mr. Hsu.

"Her overriding sentiment was to move on and not get bogged down in the matter," said a person familiar with the deliberations.

That was a departure from how Mrs. Clinton might have handled a comparable situation in the 1990s, when she might have been more "lawyerly," dug her heels in and said little - generally her default method of crisis management back then. Today, "it is what it is" has become a favorite phrase of Mrs. Clinton.

"Now there seems to be a greater acceptance for the realities of things," said Mr. Breaux, her former Senate colleague.

Mrs. Clinton ended the interview about her management practices precisely on time. She had to move on to a series of meetings, then more Senate votes before flying to Iowa for a debate.

"That's the real management challenge," Mrs. Clinton said, heading out the door, "Staying sane."

By Mark Leibovich, The New York Times, October 26, 2007

CHICAGO -- These are difficult days for supporters of Barack Obama. This city is filled with people who have voted for, worked for, contributed to and, in many cases, prayed for the success of the young senator from Illinois. The struggle he has had in trying to overtake Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination is wearing on their morale.

Last weekend, I heard them tell each other that while the race started months ago, it is still the early going; that the crucial days in Iowa and New Hampshire are still ahead; and that there is time for Obama to close with a rush, as he did when he came from behind to capture the nomination for his Senate seat in 2004.

But the steady drumbeat of polls showing Clinton with more support than all the other Democrats combined -- and twice as much as Obama -- is taking a toll. In their private moments, they wonder whether even Obama, gifted as he is, can pull off this feat.

Such doubts can afflict any trailing candidate's campaign, but they are particularly pronounced -- and poignant -- in this case. Obama burst onto the national stage with such high expectations, fueled by his remarkable sppech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention in Boston, that nothing, including the presidency, seemed beyond his reach.

The elevated stature he enjoyed nationally was nothing compared with the near reverence he commands among his friends here. Those who have worked closely with him through the past decade, in politics, community affairs or the antiwar movement, exhaust the list of superlatives in speaking about him and his wife, Michelle.

They see Obama as someone uniquely positioned to heal a divided nation -- and to change the image of America in the world -- simply by virtue of his history and personality. They can visualize the headlines and television coverage around the globe if he were elected to the White House.

Among the Obama faithful, Hillary Clinton is not reviled. Indeed, there is a good deal of admiration for the way she has conducted herself in the campaign.

But at every turn, Obama's people feel that he has been outmaneuvered and outsmarted by Clinton's timing and tactics. Nothing is more painful to them -- or more typical -- than what happened Oct. 2.

That date was the fifth anniversary of the speech that Obama gave to a rally outside Chicago City Hall, called to mobilize opposition to the looming war with Iraq. In the speech, which has been quoted many times, Obama, then eyeing a Senate campaign, defied public opinion and decried what he called a "dumb" war. He has often cited his prescience on that issue as the best evidence that, despite his short tenure in Washington, he has the judgment to make the right calls on crucial questions of national security.

The Obama campaign, therefore, announced that the fifth anniversary would be a special day for them, the date of a major foreign policy address. After some debate, the campaign decided not to stage a repetition of the outdoor rally but rather to have him speak in a college auditorium, a better setting for a thoughtful address.

The speech that he delivered at DePaul University here was as serious a discussion of the lessons of Iraq and the future of American foreign policy as anyone could wish. And, as I was repeatedly reminded by the Obama people, it got next to no national press coverage. It was briefly summarized on Page A8 of The Post, Page 11 of the Boston Globe and Page 20 of the New York Times.

Why? Because the Clinton campaign, with exquisite timing, that same morning released its latest-quarter fundraising totals, which put her ahead of Obama for the first time in the money race. The Page 1 stories in the next day's Times and Post were simple: Clinton, leading all the polls, now leads in campaign finances as well.

The pessimists in the Obama camp worry that never again will they have such an opportunity to highlight his early opposition to the war -- in contrast to Clinton's vote for the resolution that President Bush used when he ordered the attack on Baghdad.

That is probably an exaggeration. Future debates, especially those coming in Iowa and New Hampshire, may provide more openings. It is also the case that the voters in those states are far less firmly attached to their current candidate preferences than polling numbers would suggest. There is, in fact, time for Obama to rally. It's just hard for his people to believe it right now.

By David S. Broder, The Washington Post, October 25, 2007

Democrats enjoy a big political advantage over Republicans on health care, a year before a U.S. election in which it's going to be a major issue.

Americans, by a more than 2-to-1 margin, say Democratic presidential candidates have better overall solutions to health- care questions than do Republicans, according to a new Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll.

Presidential candidates of both parties have placed the issue at the top of their agendas amid growing voter concern about health costs -- rising at about double the annual rate of wages -- and the 47 million people who lack insurance.

Americans also back Democrats when presented with specific plans to deal with these issues: Just over half those surveyed say they favor requiring everyone to buy insurance; barring insurers from turning people down or charging extra for medical reasons; and subsidizing those who can't afford coverage. Those proposals have been offered by Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton and former North Carolina Senator John Edwards.

"It's important to help people who can't buy insurance on their own,'' said Pearl Stephenson, 58, a Republican in Oak Park, Michigan, in a follow-up interview. "I'm a retired Detroit teacher, so I have my health insurance, but it's a problem in America. It would influence who I vote for.''

People who identify themselves as Democrats overwhelmingly back their party's candidates, with more than eight out of 10 saying they have the best ideas on health issues. Four out of 10 independents like the Democrats' proposals, while just 15 percent of independents favor those of Republicans. About six in 10 Republicans favor the plans put forward by their party's candidates.

Across Party Lines

Support for proposals by Democratic candidates crossed party lines.

Almost half of Republicans surveyed say they like the idea of requiring large businesses to either offer insurance to their workers or pay a tax to help cover the costs of those who can't afford it on their own, a plan put forth by Clinton, 59, Edwards, 54, and Illinois Senator Barack Obama, 46. More than seven out of 10 Democrats and more than six out of 10 independents support that approach.

Americans back Democrats' ideas partly because the Republicans haven't been as detailed in their proposals, said Jason Furman, director of the Hamilton Project policy initiative at Brookings Institution, a Washington research group.

'Front and Center'

Democratic candidates have "put the issue front and center in the campaign,'' said Furman, a former aide in President Bill Clinton's administration.

The poll of 1,209 adults was taken Oct. 19-22. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

Forty-four percent of those surveyed supported a core health-care proposal by Republican candidates: tax credits to make insurance more affordable without limiting the ability of insurance companies' to decide who they cover and at what charge. Republican candidates including former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, 63, Senator John McCain, 71, of Arizona and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, 60, have incorporated similar suggestions in their proposals. Instead of expanding the government's role in providing or monitoring health insurance, their plans rely on markets to bring costs down and give people more choice and tax credits to help them afford coverage.

Fear Losing Coverage

Employer-provided health benefits cover about half the people in the U.S., according to a 2007 survey by the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Those who have to buy insurance on their own may face higher costs or difficulties getting coverage if they have pre-existing medical problems.

Among those surveyed in the Bloomberg/L.A. Times poll, 13 percent say they or someone in their household is staying in a job they don't want because they fear losing health coverage. This concern was expressed by 11 percent of those making more than $100,000, and 15 percent of those making less than $40,000.

"You might not be able to get another job that offered benefits and it can be more expensive to get on your own,'' said Arlene Thorne, 53, from Port Chester, New York, who works as an administrator for a company and has a household income of more than $100,000. "The health system doesn't work. There's nothing more to say about it.''

Fifty-three percent of respondents say they support a government-run, government-financed national health program to cover all Americans.

Clinton and Edwards have both proposed creating a national health plan to compete with private insurance plans, with Edwards saying this would be a way to test what sort of system Americans preferred.

Republican candidates reject that idea.

Among Democrats, 64 percent like the idea of a government- organized and financed health program, as did 51 percent of independents and 30 percent of Republicans.

By Aliza Marcus, Bloomberg, October 25, 2007

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in Michigan shows that New York Senator Hillary Clinton leads all challengers in the race for the state's Electoral College votes. At the same time, the poll shows voters are less than thrilled with the performance of Governor Jennifer Granholm.

Clinton leads Rudy Giuliani in Michigan by nine points (47% to 38%) and holds a thirteen point margin over Thompson (50% to 37%). Those margins are unchanged since August. Two other Republicans, John McCain and Mitt Romney, have gained a bit of ground but still trail Clinton by seven.

Clinton is viewed favorably by 54%, a figure none of the Republicans can match in Michigan. Giuliani and McCain each get positive reviews from 49% of the state's voters, Romney from 46%, and Thompson from 42%. Sixty-five percent (65%) of Michigan voters know that Romney's father was once Governor of their state. Only 16%, however, say that's more likely to make them vote for the younger Romney.

Just 29% of voters say that Governor Granholm is doing a good or an excellent job while 42% give her poor marks. Twenty-six percent (26%) are in the middle and say she's doing a fair job. A troubling number for the Governor is the fact that just 44% of Democrats give her good or excellent marks. Another worrisome indicator is that 50% of unaffiliated voters say she's doing a poor job.

By a 42% to 36% margin, Michigan voters say they trust Democrats more than Republicans to handle the state's economic problems. A plurality, 43%, of unaffiliated voters say that they don't trust either party on the economic issues.

Forty-two percent (42%) of Michigan voters say labor unions are good for the economy while 32% take the opposite view. Republicans, by a 2-to-1 margin, say unions are bad for the economy. Democrats, by a 3-to-1 margin, say the unions are good.

Just 34% of Michigan voters say free trade is good for the economy while 40% say the opposite. Nationally, voters are a bit more positive about the impact of free trade. In Michigan, 49% of Republicans say free trade is good while 45% of Democrats take the opposite view.

The poll was conducted in partnership with Fox Television Stations, Inc.

Nationally, Hillary Clinton currently leads all Republican Presidential hopefuls in general election match-ups.

She also hold a dominant lead in national polling for the Democratic Presidential nomination, is seen as the most electable Democrat, and is ahead in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Florida.

There is no clear Republican frontrunner. Giuliani leads the national polls, Thompson is seen as the most conservative candidate, and Romney leads in Iowa.

This telephone survey of 500 Likely Voters was conducted by Rasmussen Reports in patnership with FOX Television Stations, Inc. on October 17, 2007. The margin of sampling error for the survey is +/- 4.5 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

Rasmussen Reports, October 25, 2007

THE RACE: The presidential primary race for Democrats, Republicans in New Hampshire

THE NUMBERS - DEMOCRATS

Hillary Rodham Clinton, 43 percent

Barack Obama, 22 percent

John Edwards, 14 percent

Bill Richardson, 6 percent

THE NUMBERS - REPUBLICANS

Mitt Romney, 32 percent

Rudy Giuliani, 22 percent

John McCain, 15 percent

Ron Paul, 7 percent

Mike Huckabee, 6 percent

Fred Thompson, 5 percent

OF INTEREST:

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney maintain their leads in New Hampshire. Clinton polls strongly across genders, religions and age groups, despite Obama's image as the candidate of young people. Clinton has twice the support of Obama among 18-to-29-year-olds. Romney polled well across religious groups, suggesting that his Mormon faith is not an issue in New Hampshire. And while Clinton and Romney pulled a plurality among voters of their respective parties, the picture is unclear among undeclared voters. More than 40 percent of voters who identify themselves as undeclared said they still have not decided if they will vote in the Democratic or Republican primary.

The telephone survey done by SRBI Research in New York City of 1,514 New Hampshire voters was conducted Oct. 15-21 for the New Hampshire Institute of Politics at Saint Anselm College with a sampling error margin of plus or minus 2.5 percentage points. The survey includes 613 likely Democratic primary voters with a sampling error margin of plus or minus 4 percentage points, 498 likely Republican primary voters with a sampling error margin of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points and 352 undeclared voters with a sampling error margin of plus or minus 5 percent.

Associated Press, October 25, 2007

Hillary Clinton will have a blowout bash in Manhattan Thursday night to round out her sixth decade on the planet, a follow-up to a high-rolling fundraiser earlier this week hosted by Hollywood big shots.

The headliner for Clinton's 60th birthday party at the Beacon Theater is rocker Elvis Costello. He'll be introduced by Billy Crystal. But the real star power may be Clinton's husband and former president, Bill Clinton.

Either way, plenty of glitz will be offered up in New York's Upper West Side as well as plenty of cash. Orchestra seats for the event reportedly cost the maximum campaign contribution of $2,300 per guest. Balcony spots were priced at $100. A crowd of 2,500 is expected.

Thursday's party isn't the first day this week the senator's birthday has been celebrated. On Sunday, director Rob Reiner sang, "Happy Birthday, Mrs. President" - a variation on Marilyn Monroe's saccharine ode to President Kennedy in 1962 - at a fundraiser at his Brentwood, Calif., home that drew roughly $500,000 for her presidential campaign.

Clinton campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle has also invited supporters through the campaign Web site to sign an e-card for her boss, and even a potential Republican competitor offered his well-wishes.

"Happy birthday, Senator Clinton. Now we are both over the hill," GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney said Thursday in Manchester, N.H. Clinton's friends aren't the only ones celebrating her big day, however. A new documentary being released by a political foe is also scheduled for release on Friday - Clinton's true birthday. And the Republican National Committee took the opportunity to wish good riddance to Clinton's style of government. "While Hillary Clinton may be wishing for government-run health care, Washington-controlled retirement plans, and budget-busting baby bonds, the American people are wishing they won't have to pay for Clinton's $750 billion in additional spending," RNC spokesman Danny Diaz said.

If she is worried about hitting the big 6-0, Clinton isn't showing it.

"Sixty is the new 50," she said at an AARP convention earlier this year. Joking about her male rivals in the presidential race, she has stated she's grateful at her age to get so much attention from men.

FOX News, October 25, 2007

WASHINGTON - Memo to the Democratic presidential candidates: You can still beat Hillary Rodham Clinton, but you better act fast.

The former first lady looks more likely to win the nomination every day, showing strength in polling, fundraising and setting the campaign agenda.

She's so strong, in fact, that the race has become about her. And Democratic operatives from presidential campaigns past and present say the only way for any other candidate to win the nomination is to make an even stronger case against her. "If this were a wedding, we'd be at the 'speak now or forever hold your peace' part," said Steve McMahon, who advised Howard Dean in 2004. "If you're a candidate hoping to get past her, the time for nuance and veiled references has passed."

There is always the chance that Clinton could make an error in the next couple of months that would hurt her chances. Some argue that her vote against Iran at a time when anti-war Democrats are concerned about war there has the potential to damage her standing.

But Democratic insiders, including some working on various 2008 campaigns who spoke on condition of anonymity, agree that barring a major stumble, Clinton is all but sure to win the nomination if she wins the opening contest in Iowa. She is polling well in the states that follow, and no one else would be able to challenge her unless an Iowa loss made her look vulnerable.

"If Hillary wins Iowa, she can practically start shopping for a running mate," said California--based Democratic strategist Dan Newman. But that's a big if. Clinton has called Iowa her "hardest state," and it's the best - some say only - chance her opponents have to get past her.

"At this point the trailing candidates need to not only catch a huge wave, they also need one to crash on top of Hillary," Newman said. "They need to upend the conventional wisdom that is gelling among donors and others that she can't be stopped, and they need to prove it in Iowa."

The most recent polls in the state show a close race among Clinton and fellow Sens. John Edwards and Barack Obama.

Edwards has been making a more vigorous case recently against Clinton's ability to win a general election. He's also led criticisms of her that have been picked up by other candidates — that she's too connected to lobbyists and that her vote to declare the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization could be a repeat of her mistake in voting for the Iraq war. Those criticisms haven't hurt her yet, but they could as more people begin to pay closer attention in the closing days of the race. Some advise that the Clinton campaign should consider fighting back against Edwards or anyone else who takes her on so directly.

"While Edwards is attacking her as being unelectable, the GOP is also saying she is polarizing and out of the mainstream," said Donna Brazile, who ran Al Gore'ss campaign in 2000. "Time to deck them or push back."

Joe Biden and Chris Dodd have been more aggressively criticizing her on foreign policy. Obama says there needs to be a change away from Washington insiders while generally avoiding mention of her name.

And at a time when Obama needs to be winning voters away from Clinton, instead he's been playing defense. Just this week he's been under fire from gay activists who objected to a participant in his gospel concert series, and his campaign agreed to return some donations after The Washington Post reported that they came from children. Most of those interviewed say Obama needs to get tougher on Clinton.

"I don't buy this 'Politics of Hope' means you can't engage the next candidate," said strategist Jamal Simmons. "People want to be hopeful, but people want to know you are tough enough to win and you are tough enough to lead the country."

In comparison to Obama, Simmons said, "people are very clear what John Edwards is running for. He's there fighting for the working man and woman, and he's taking his shots. Even at some times he may seem to the outside world to be too strident and hitting it too hard. But he's hitting, and people respect that."

But some inside the Clinton and Obama camps think it would be a mistake for Obama to go on the attack in a multi-candidate race. They ask: Why not sit back and let Edwards and others try to take her down, while he tries to rise above?

"I think with name ID as high as Senator Clinton's, there is little new information about her that would change voter's minds," said Erik Smith, who worked for Dick Gephartdt in 2004. "A candidate can move late in Iowa if making a strong case for themselves as the best candidate to win the general." That happened in the last Iowa presidential primary. In 2004, Dean was the front-runner, and Gephardt went after him hard. Dean and Gephardt fell into third and fourth place respectively in the caucus, behind John Kerry and Edwards.

"Her opponents will have opportunities to slow her down, but the risks of doing what that will take come at a considerable risk," said Democratic consultant Michael Feldman, who works for Gore. He is not aligned with any campaign this election cycle, but has donated to Clinton. "Take Senator Obama, for example. It's hard to slash and burn when you have said that you want to move beyond negative campaigning. He runs a serious risk of undermining his brand."

And there's no indication it would work since she's done well with what's come at her so far. "There is no doubt that she will be tested, but she is running the kind of campaign that indicates her ability to roll through those inevitable challenges," Feldman said.

By Nedra Pickler, Associated Press, October 25, 2007

Any minute now, voters in Iowan and New Hampshire will head to the polls and select the presidential candidate who cooked them the best dinner and did the best job ironing their shirts.

The personal attention candidates for the highest office in the land are lavishing on citizens of those two small states -- the wannabes have made, I kid you not, at least 1,448 appearances in Iowa and 691 in New Hampshire this year alone -- contrasts rather sharply with what we get here:

Total appearances by all candidates in Virginia: 40. In Maryland: 16. And most of those were fundraisers for high rollers.

When it comes to picking the nominees for president, Virginia, Maryland and the District have about as much say as Finland.

We don't see the TV ads. We don't hear the speeches. More important, we don't get a chance to put issues that matter here onto the campaign agenda.

By the time Virginia, Maryland and the District hold their presidential primaries Feb. 12, 33 states will have selected their convention delegates. The game will be long over. And the result will be decided more by money than by any real appeal to the people. All but one of the major party nominees since 1980 have been the candidates who had raised the most cash by the end of the year before the election.

The calendar wasn't always this front-loaded. Last cycle, John Kerry wrapped up the Democratic nomination Feb. 17, but back in 1984, it took until June 5 for Walter Mondale to secure the prize.

Not so amazingly, participation in primary voting was considerably higher back when a presidential campaign took place in the actual year in which the election was held.

But the problem with this hopped-up campaign is not merely one of narrowed participation. It's also about what matters to people in different parts of the country. The war in Iraq tops lists of voter concerns most everywhere, but a Washington Post poll of Virginians this month found the economy in second place, whereas a slew of surveys put health care in that slot on voters' agendas nationwide. Issues such as ethics and transportation show up on the Virginia list, but not elsewhere. The current structure of presidential politics makes little concession to the existence of distinct realities in different regions.

Would today's highly packaged candidates make a greater effort to engage on tougher questions if they had to campaign in more places? Would visiting places such as Loudoun and Charles counties clue them in on the need to address development, the stresses of time-starved commuters' lives, and our decaying bonds of community? Would campaigning in Montgomery, Fairfax or the District (that'll be the day) confront candidates with the effects of rising income inequality and the crunch caused by the lack of affordable housing?

Perhaps not, but we won't know until we take the election process back from the party hacks, incumbent politicians and the campaign industry -- the consultants, TV stations and media buyers who make fortunes off an ever-more crimped democracy.

Frustrated state officials have tried to combat the hegemony of Iowa and New Hampshire by pushing their primary dates ever earlier, but this arms race helps not at all. There are all sorts of reform plans out there, including one, known as the American Plan, that would continue the tradition of starting the voting in small states, where retail politics warms hearts and truly does test candidates' spine and stamina. But the plan would then use a rotating calendar of increasingly large states, with primaries taking place every two weeks through 10 sets of votes.

The idea is to keep as many candidates as possible in the race throughout the spring of election year while forcing politicians to face voters in most regions. Who knows? A more balanced schedule might even revive the great tradition of favorite son candidates who inject regional issues and passions into the national debate.

In the meantime, the presidential nominees will probably be set long before most Americans pay the slightest attention to the candidates. All we can do in this part of the country right now is stage our own Pretend Primary. To make certain our voices are heard, we need to do this quickly. The vote will take place on my blog, Raw Fisher, at http://blog.washingtonpost.com/rawfisher, Dec. 13. Until then, we'll gather online every Thursday to thrash out which issues the candidates should be attending to. The potential presidents won't come to us, but that shouldn't stop us. We can choose democracy even if the politicians don't play along.

By Marc Fisher, The Washington Post, October 25, 2007

College students in Iowa may need to snap out of their New Year's Day hangover extra early this year if they want to participate in the state's presidential caucuses.

With the Iowa Republican caucuses moved up to Jan. 3, and the Democratic contests possibly happening in the first week of January as well, Iowa students will have to brave the Midwestern winter right after the holidays to vote.

It is unclear how this will affect the outcome, but it almost certainly will impact Democratic candidates more than Republicans, because many more young people are likely to caucus as Democrats, according to polls that ask which party primary voters plan to participate in.

If an earlier caucus date depresses turnout among college students, that's likely bad news for Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.), whose supporters in Iowa skew younger than those of John Edwards. If the date disperses youth support throughout the state instead of concentrating it on campuses, however, it's a potential boon to candidates with the strongest support among college students. So much so that Obama's campaign - which runs especially strong among college students - will actually encourage college voters to caucus at home, regardless of the date. Obama has built an apparent advantage among college students, according to national polls and interviews with Iowa students. Crowds of thousands greet his campaign stops on campus, and his Facebook groups are larger than those of his competitors.

Although most polls of likely Iowa caucus-goers do not offer age breakouts because of the small sample sizes, Obama enjoys much broader support among young college voters than non-collegiate youth in the national surveys. That's reflected on the ground in Iowa, where even student organizers for Clinton and Edwards say that Obama draws the strongest support on their campuses.

If the Democratic caucuses are held in the first week of January, they will happen before any college in Iowa has returned from winter break. This makes Obama's emphasis on college students a bigger gamble, with more risk and, potentially, more reward. If students are on campus during the caucuses, they are easier to mobilize - but their votes are then concentrated in those college-town precincts. In Iowa - where a candidate needs to hit a certain percentage threshold in every precinct - that devalues their votes. But in rural precincts, where many caucuses have only 60 or so participants, a few extra votes from college students who are on winter break can swing the outcome. So, if students are home with their parents throughout the state and still vote in the caucuses, the payoff for Obama could actually be greater. "In fact it could be an advantage [for the Obama campaign] that the caucus happens during winter break because their votes are distributed around the state," said Hans Riemer, Obama's national youth vote director.

"An additional vote in a smaller precinct can be more valuable than an additional vote in a large precinct," explained Obama's Iowa communications director, Josh Earnest.

Thus, Obama campaign officials will encourage student supporters to caucus in their home precincts even if the caucus is held on Jan. 14, when some schools will be back in session. "Even if it was happening while they were in school, we'd try our best to get them back home," said Riemer.

For John Edwards, who has strong support throughout Iowa but apparently lags behind Obama on college campuses, the calculation is precisely the opposite. His Iowa communications director, Dan Leistikow, says that the campaign will not try to get their student supporters to caucus in one place or another. But Kelsey Sloss, a University of Iowa junior who volunteers for the Edwards campaign, will caucus from her campus address in Iowa City regardless othe date. She says that her home precinct is already leaning toward Edwards, but Iowa City is Obama country - so her vote will add more value there.

Caucusing at school during winter break is not an option for all students. Like most upper-classmen, Sloss lives off campus and can stay at her apartment during breaks. But freshmen who live in dorms may not be allowed back before the spring semester starts. At the University of Iowa, for example, only certain dorms are open during break; at many other schools, such as Drake University in Des Moines, none are open.

This is especially important for students from out of state. Although the vast majority of college students in Iowa are in-staters, some college students who have signed up to support candidates hail from across the country. If they live off campus they can come back to Iowa to caucus, but if they live in a dorm, they may be out of luck.

Officials with Clinton's campaign say an earlier date will make no difference to her campaign. "It's not going to change our approach," said spokesman Isaac Baker.

But her student volunteers are working on contingency plans. Nikki Dziuban, a 19-year-old sophomore from the Chicago suburbs, is co-president of Students for Hillary at the University of Iowa. She says the original caucus date of Jan. 14 would boost student turnout because out-of-state students like her would be "more inclined to come back if it's just a couple days earlier than if it's right in the middle of break." (Spring semester there begins Jan. 22.)

Other students say that they don't have a choice. Drake sophomore Maggie Abney will caucus at her parent's precinct near Davenport because she does not have on-campus housing over winter break.

Yet the most enthusiastic student supporters from out of state say they are determined to find a way to caucus in Iowa. Obama supporter Vernon Jackson, a junior at the University of Iowa who is from Orlando, Fla., says he will return to school and stay with friends in order to vote, even if his dorm is closed.

Lauren Del Boccio, a University of Iowa sophomore from Chicago will also try to make the caucuses but said a Jan. 3 date "is too close to the holidays." She added, "I have quite a few friends that may not caucus," if the date is moved up.

With so much confusion surrounding the already intimidating process of caucusing for the first time, student organizers in Iowa worry that their peers will become discouraged and disengaged. "If it was not during break, it would have a huge impact. A lot more people would turn out," Dziuban said. "It really stinks, actually."




By Ben Adler, The Politico, October 24, 2007

Democratic voters are looking favorably on her experience as first lady, even on her failed healthcare effort, a poll finds.

WASHINGTON -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has neutralized the political fallout from some of the most difficult moments of her eight years as first lady, with Democratic voters looking favorably on her failed effort to revamp healthcare and either supporting or having no opinion of her decision to remain loyal to an unfaithful husband, a new Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll shows.

The positive impression of Clinton's White House years -- which is shared, though more faintly, among the broader public -- is helping propel her to a formidable lead over her rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination. Clinton leads the No. 2 contender, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, 48% to 17%.

Her support has risen 15 percentage points since the last nationwide Times/Bloomberg poll in June, while Obama's support has fallen 5 percentage points.

As a leading actor in her husband's presidency, Clinton entered the race for the White House linked tightly to his legacy of personal scandal and political polarization. But today, the Times/Bloomberg poll found, nearly two-thirds of Democrats and nearly half of all voters say Hillary Clinton's famously unsuccessful effort in the 1990s to provide health coverage for all Americans makes her better able now to deal with healthcare as president.

More than 7 in 10 Democrats, and about half of all voters, said they would welcome a White House advisory role for Bill Clinton, who jokes that he would be called "first laddy" if his wife became president.

And 42% of Democrats agreed it was the "right thing" for Hillary Clinton to stick with her husband after his affair with a White House intern, compared with 5% who said it was the wrong choice. At the same time, the former first lady remains a polarizing figure -- viewed unfavorably by 44% of respondents. But a favorable rating of 48% is relatively high for Clinton.

In the Republican presidential contest, former New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani is favored by 32% of GOP voters -- more than twice that of his closest rival, former Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee, the poll found.

But danger looms for Republicans should they nominate the politically moderate Giuliani: About one-third of GOP voters said they would consider supporting a third-party candidate in the general election if the party nominee supported abortion and gay rights. That finding comes as some evangelical leaders are threatening a boycott of the GOP next year should Giuliani become the party's nominee.

The survey, conducted Oct. 19-22 and supervised by Times Poll Director Susan Pinkus, sampled the views of 1,039 registered voters nationwide and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

Though the party nominations will be decided on a state-by-state basis, the national findings shed light on the early strength of Clinton and her fellow Democrats in the race for the White House.

Among all registered voters, the New York senator wins hypothetical head-to-head matchups against each of the four most high-profile Republican candidates. For example, Clinton tops Giuliani 47% to 41%, on the edge of the poll's margin of error. She beats the other GOP candidates by larger margins in the hypothetical contests.

Obama also beats all four top Republicans in hypothetical matchups, though his three-point margin over Giuliani is within the poll's error margin.

And on one of the biggest issues of the campaign, Iraq, more voters say they think Democrats would be best at handling the war. The party's 40% to 34% lead on that topic underscores how dramatically President Bush's Middle East policies have reversed the Republicans' long-held advantages on issues of war and peace.

In the Democratic primary contest, Clinton's lead has become strong enough that she is making significant inroads among voters who once were considered Obama's core supporters, including higher-income and college-educated Democrats. "She's been very resilient," said poll respondent Peter Schwedock, 64, a trial lawyer who lives in Weston, Fla. He said he decided to support Clinton only after watching her campaign over the last six months. "People are beginning to realize that with eight years as first lady, she was more involved in everything than first ladies have been in the past," Schwedock said.

The recent poll, however, offers some cautions for Clinton.

Nearly one-third of Democratic voters in the poll, including almost a third of Democratic women, say she is "too polarizing a candidate, making it difficult for her to win the November presidential election."

And only 28% of Democrats describe Clinton as "the most ethical or truthful" candidate in the party's presidential field -- though in that category she leads Obama, who was rated "most ethical" by 21% of Democratic respondents, and former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, with 17%.

Also, Clinton still faces a challenge among crucial independent voters, who are likely to play a decisive role in general election battleground states such as Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Arizona. By 46% to 42%, more of those voters view her unfavorably than favorably. "I want something fresh in the White House, and if Hillary Clinton is in the White House, I am going to check out," said poll respondent Sharon DuPree, 53, of Charleston, S.C. DuPree called herself an independent voter most interested in electing a candidate who would fix the nation's healthcare system. But she said she could not support Clinton. "She's had her shot at getting healthcare, and she ended up with nothing," DuPree said.

Clinton's negative ratings have shifted significantly in recent months, other surveys show. The Gallup Poll, for example, reports that Clinton's unfavorable rating among all voters climbed to 52% in April from 40% in February, before falling this month to 44% -- the same rating as reported in the Times/Bloomberg poll.

Though more independent voters view Clinton unfavorably, she can rely on her husband for some help with this group.

Independents are among those who said they would be pleased to see the return of the former president, with 53% agreeing it would be a "good thing" for the country if he were "in the White House and in a position to offer advice on domestic and foreign issues."

The same held for 71% of Democrats, who clearly do not feel a sense of "Clinton fatigue" that Republican strategists hope to exploit if the former first lady wins the Democratic nomination.

"With Hillary, you really do get two for one," said poll respondent Katy Molick, 50, a General Motors computer systems analyst and registered Democrat who lives in suburban Detroit. If Bill Clinton "were a roving ambassador, maybe he could solve some of the problems where the Bush administration doesn't seem interested in using diplomacy."

On healthcare, the poll findings suggest that Clinton has successfully turned one of her great failures as first lady into an advantage.

Clinton often says she has the bruises to show from her hard-learned lessons on healthcare -- and 49% of voters say that her experience from the 1990s would help her reform healthcare as president. Only 19% said it would hurt her if she tried to tackle the issue again. "She's a person who learns from her mistakes," said poll respondent Gerard Aman, a retired government economist in McLean, Va.

Overall, the survey shows how much the Democratic race has solidified -- particularly with the near-certainty that Vice President Al Gore will not join the field. In the Times/Bloomberg poll in June in which Clinton held an 11-percentage point lead over Obama, Gore won support from 15% of Democrats.

The survey found that Clinton, with support from 48% of Democrats, and Obama, with 17%, were followed by Edwards with 13%, and Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, with 2% each. Sen. Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut, Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich of Ohio and former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel together drew less than 2% support. Some 15% did not make a selection.

While the Democratic race is increasingly dominated by Clinton, Republicans remain divided, uncertain and, in some cases, disaffected.

The Times/Bloomberg survey found that Giuliani, with 32% support, was followed by Thompson at 15%, Sen. John McCain of Arizona at 13%, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney at 11%, and former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas at 7%. Reps. Ron Paul of Texas, Tom Tancredo of Colorado and Duncan Hunter of Alpine drew 2% each. Some 16% made no selection.

But Giuliani's lead in the national poll contrasts with the results of Times/Bloomberg polls in early-voting states in September. Those surveys showed Romney leading in Iowa and New Hampshire, and Thompson leading in South Carolina. Candidates hope that wins in the earliest-voting states will give them momentum to win in the bigger states that vote later.

Though Giuliani's record includes support for abortion and gay rights, a potential liability among social conservative voters who are important in the GOP primaries, 1 in 5 Republicans nonetheless said Giuliani was the candidate "best at handling social issues." He scored higher in that category than did than any other GOP candidate. More than one-fourth of respondents said they were not sure which candidate would be best.

Giuliani has built a lead in the GOP field even though only half of Republicans said they would support a candidate who supports abortion and gay rights. Thirty-four percent of Republicans said social conservatives should run a third-party candidate if an abortion-rights supporter or gay rights advocate won the nomination. But -- underscoring the unsettled nature of the GOP race -- about 25% of that group said they would vote for Giuliani.

More than 6 in 10 Republicans said they might change their minds on their current selection for GOP nominee -- including most of those who said they would support Romney.



By Peter Wallsten and Janet Hook, Los Angeles Times, October 24, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton could carry the Garden State in the 2008 United States presidential election, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. At least 51 per cent of respondents in New Jersey would vote for the New York senator in head-to-head 2008 contests against four prospective Republican rivals.

Rodham Clinton holds an 11-point lead over former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, an 18-point advantage over actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson, a 16-point lead over Arizona senator John McCain, and a 24-point advantage over former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.

In 2004, Democratic nominee John Kerry carried New Jersey's 15 electoral votes, with 53 per cent of the vote. No Republican has won the Garden State since George H. Bush in 1988.

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, October 23, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Many Democratic Party supporters in the United States believe Hillary Rodham Clinton should become their presidential nominee in 2008, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. 46 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in a primary.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 24 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 11 per cent. Support is lower for New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich, Delaware senator Joe Biden, and Connecticut senator Chris Dodd.

On Oct. 20, Edwards criticized the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) during the Bill Clinton administration, saying, "In the 1990s, we didn't get universal health care, which we needed. We got the NAFTA, which we didn't need. I think we've been asking the wrong questions about these proposed trade deals. The question seems to have been, 'Is this trade deal good for the profits of big multinational corporations?'"

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, October 23, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Hillary Rodham Clinton has extended her lead among the Democratic Party's United States presidential contenders in the Hawkeye State, according to a poll by Strategic Vision. 28 per cent of Democratic caucus voters in Iowa will support the New York senator next year, up four points since September.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 23 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 20 per cent, and New Mexico governor Bill Richardson with nine per cent. Support is lower for Delaware senator Joe Biden, Connecticut senator Chris Dodd, and Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich.

In the sample of Republican Party supporters, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney is first with 27 per cent, followed by former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani with 13 per cent, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee with 12 per cent, and actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson with 10 per cent. Support is lower for Arizona senator John McCain, Texas congressman Ron Paul, Kansas senator Sam Brownback, Colorado congressman Tom Tancredo, and California congressman Duncan Hunter.

Since 1976, the Iowa caucus has kicked off the process of finding presidential nominees for the two major political parties in the United States. The caucus differs from a presidential primary because the casting of ballots in favour of a particular candidate is preceded by a "gathering of neighbours" where specific platform issues are discussed.

In 2004, Massachusetts senator John Kerry won the Democratic Iowa caucus with 38 per cent, followed by Edwards with 32 per cent, former Vermont governor Howard Dean with 18 per cent, Missouri congressman Dick Gephardt with 11 per cent, and Kucinich with one per cent. Incumbent president George W. Bush won the Republican caucus unopposed.

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, October 23, 2007

Oct. 24 (Bloomberg) -- Two New Yorkers dominate the 2008 presidential race: Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani.

A new Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll shows that Senator Clinton has opened up a 31-point gap over her chief Democratic rival, Barack Obama, leading 48 percent to 17 percent. She also runs ahead of all Republicans in general-election matchups, with only Giuliani coming close, trailing by 6 percentage points.

The poll shows that a number of Clinton's perceived weaknesses, from her failed 1994 health-care plan to her decision to stay with her husband after he had an affair with a White House intern, aren't liabilities. Driving her support are women voters, a central focus of the Clinton campaign, which is pushing such programs as expanded paid family leave and affordable health insurance.

"Clinton is really solidifying her Democratic support,'' said Susan Pinkus, the Los Angeles Times polling director. "She is getting the backing of many of the major groups among the Democratic primary voters.''

Giuliani, 63, is backed by 32 percent of likely Republican voters, more than double the support of his closest rival, Fred Thompson, who has 15 percent. Following closely behind are Senator John McCain of Arizona, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee. Giuliani's lead is his biggest of the year in this poll.

Undisputed Leader

The former New York mayor leads among his party's moderates, conservatives, most income groups and both men and women. Among self-described Christian conservative voters, who make up almost 30 percent of Republicans, he runs about even with Thompson and well ahead of the other contenders. The poll defines these voters as people who say they believe the Bible is to be taken literally. "Giuliani's toughness and leadership qualities seem to be trumping traditional Republican positions,'' said Scott Reed, a Republican strategist not aligned with any campaign.

With the 2008 caucuses and primaries only 10 weeks away, Clinton, 59, and Giuliani have gotten consistently stronger throughout this year. The two were slated to run against each other for the U.S. Senate in 2000 before Giuliani dropped out after he was diagnosed with cancer.

Clinton's commanding lead in the Democratic field is being fueled by strong backing among both men and women, as well as minorities. By more than a 2-to-1 margin, all voters think it's a good thing that her husband, former President Bill Clinton, would be in a position to offer advice on issues in the White House; Democrats believe this by a margin of 71 percent to 5 percent.

Benefiting From Bill

"The man knows his way around the international arena and he knows policy in a pretty in-depth way,'' said Matthew Tirman, a 27-year-old consultant from Great Falls, Virginia, in a follow-up interview.

The Oct. 19-22 poll surveyed 1,039 registered voters, with a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points; for Democratic and Republican voters it was 4 points.

Among the poll's other findings: Only 5 percent of Democratic primary voters and 28 percent of Republicans believe it was a mistake for Clinton to stay with her husband after he had the affair. Almost half of all voters say her unsuccessful attempt to pass health-care legislation during Bill Clinton's administration will help her overhaul the system if she is elected.

'Panic Among Republicans'

Giuliani has made the threat posed by Clinton a centerpiece of his campaign, with repeated warnings that he is the only Republican candidate who has a chance of defeating her. There is "the perception that he can beat Hillary and there's panic among Republicans that she's almost unstoppable without him,'' said John Feehery, an unaligned Republican strategist.

In a potential trouble sign for Giuliani, the poll finds that 38 percent of Republican primary voters say they would only vote for an opponent of abortion and gay rights. Giuliani has a record of supporting both. Almost one-third of voters who say they want abortion to be illegal back him, suggesting that some may not yet be familiar with his views. Moreover, more than 60 percent of all Republicans and almost the same share of Giuliani backers say they may end up voting for another candidate.

"Right now, Giuliani leads in all groups, but that support is soft,'' said Pinkus, the Los Angeles Times Poll director. "The Republicans' choices are very, very squishy. Things could change.''

Third-Party Candidate?

Giuliani also faces the prospect of religious voters backing an anti-abortion and gay rights third-party candidate in the general election. A majority of Christian conservatives and 34 percent of all Republican primary voters say they would like to see a third- party candidate if the Republican nominee has a background of supporting abortion and gay rights.

Thompson, 65, finishes behind Giuliani in all age categories, most income levels and both genders. Men back Giuliani by 34 percent and Thompson by 15 percent; women support Giuliani by 27 percent and Thompson by 18 percent.

Among self-described conservatives, Giuliani gets 34 percent, outpacing Thompson's 19 percent. Giuliani, the only Catholic in the contest, also gets 35 percent of that vote among Republican primary voters. In a general-election matchup, Clinton and Giuliani each get 48 percent support from Catholics.

Thompson's 15 percent overall support is a drop from the 21 percent he scored in the June Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll. Since entering the race on Sept. 5, he has been criticized for running a sluggish campaign.

McCain, Huckabee

McCain, 71, who once led the field, is now at 13 percent. Romney, who is counting on winning early contests in New Hampshire and Iowa to stay in the race, has 11 percent in the national poll. Huckabee, 52, with 7 percent support, is still far from his goal of breaking into the top-tier candidates.

Although the poll provides more good news for Clinton than for any other Democratic candidate, there are troubling indicators. Almost one-third of Democratic voters believe she's a polarizing figure who will have trouble winning a general election. And she maintains high unfavorable ratings, at 44 percent, among the general voting public. Her favorable rating is 48 percent. "She's not as likeable as some of the other candidates, and they're more electable,'' said Michael Grant, a 31-year-old attorney from Chicago who is a registered Democrat.

Core Constituency

Among the groups that give Clinton a strong margin of support are self-described moderates, voters age 45 to 64, non- whites and those who earn less than $40,000 a year.

Women are her core constituency. Fifty-nine percent of women age 45 and older support her, according to the poll. Women who earn less than $40,000 a year back Clinton over Obama by a margin of 40 percent to 18 percent. She has a similar lead among women making $60,000 or more.

Obama, a 46-year-old senator from Illinois, has slipped 12 points among voters age 18 to 44. He has also lost support among whites, males and college-educated voters.

Clinton picked up 17 percentage points from the last survey in June among younger voters and made big gains among college graduates, men and those who earn more than $60,000 a year.

Overall, Obama lost 5 points from the last survey. John Edwards came in third at 13 percent, while the other candidates are in the single digits.

Most Ethical

Among Democrats, 28 percent of voters rate Clinton as the most ethical or truthful candidate, compared with 21 percent who choose Obama and 17 percent who select Edwards.

Those who have an unfavorable impression of Clinton cited weak ethics or dishonesty, liberal policies and a cold personality.

Voters show understanding of her decision to stay with her husband after learning he had an extramarital affair with Monica Lewinsky, a White House intern. Women are as supportive of her decision as men. Thirty-four percent of women say it was neither right nor wrong. "I wouldn't want to have somebody tell me I made the wrong decision,'' said Maureen Daugherty, a 46-year-old independent voter from Aurora, Colorado, who said she is divorced.

A plurality, 49 percent, also believe that Clinton will be able to put her experience on health care legislation more than a decade ago to good use as president.

"I liked the concept,'' said Genevieve Golec, an 83-year- old retired Federal Reserve clerk in Palisade, Colorado. "With every insurance company now, when you quit one job and go to another, you have no coverage.''

By Heidi Przybyla and Edwin Chen, Bloomberg, October 23, 2007

FRESNO - Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton hasn't raised much campaign cash in the Fresno area, but she showed Monday that she can raise a crowd.

The New York senator swept into the Valley for a morning rally in front of Fresno High School that attracted thousands of exuberant supporters. She later met with the United Farm Workers.

Clinton's Fresno-area fundraising is a fraction of three major Republicans – former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and Arizona Sen. John McCain – and half that of Democratic rival John Edwards, the former North Carolina senator. All four have held fundraisers in Fresno.

But none of those four has yet addressed thousands at a Fresno rally as Clinton did Monday.

Her campaign said that based on registrations, 7,500 attended the event. Campaign officials called it the largest political rally ever in Fresno – surpassing a 1968 gathering for Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy. Fresno police, however, estimated the crowd totals at 2,500 to 3,500.

Clinton, D-N.Y., has racked up endorsements from more than 50 San Joaquin Valley party leaders, including Dolores Huerta, co-founder of the United Farm Workers, and Assemblyman Juan Arambula, D-Fresno.

But Democratic presidential contenders have historically failed to attract much money or consistently build a significant voting bloc in the region. Clinton's husband carried the county in 1992 when independent Ross Perot was a factor, but was the last Democratic presidential candidate to do so, himself losing Fresno to Bob Dole in 1996.

Clinton has been a regular in San Francisco, Silicon Valley and the Los Angeles area, where she's raised a combined total of more than $10 million for her presidential campaign, but this was her first Fresno stop. There was no fundraiser.

Her crisp 30-minute address went out to a receptive audience that included hundreds of high school students and touched on the campaign themes that have made her the Democratic Party's front-runner.

She spoke on affordable health care for all, good-paying jobs, a president "who respects the Constitution" and ending the war in Iraq. That last topic received the largest ovation.

She also threw in one idea that seemed tailored to the Valley – maintaining a strong agricultural sector, though she later said the region was also a perfect place to create jobs in renewable energy ventures such as solar, biomass and biodiesel.

Clinton then set goals her administration would pursue: restoring the nation's leadership in the world, rebuilding a strong and prosperous middle class, reclaiming the future for the nation's children and reforming the government.

Of the last, she added: "Which is going to be a big job after George W. Bush and Dick Cheney leave town."

As with most political stump speeches, Clinton was long on proposals, but not on how they would be funded. She did say, however, that establishing a secure electronic medical record system that would replace paper-based medical records and billing systems could save $77 billion per year.

The speech resonated with many.

"I think she would give it a try," Fresno pharmacist Willie Whisenhunt said of Clinton's ideas. "I'm not saying she would succeed, but these are changes we need."

Outside a perimeter line established by the Clinton campaign, protesters carried signs criticizing Clinton. Fresno resident Billie Jane Houston held a sign that read "Hillary Will Tax You To Death." But it was clear that Clinton's stance on the war in Iraq bothered her the most. Houston said she has a grandson who just spent 17 months in Afghanistan, and she feels Clinton opposes providing funds that troops serving in the Mideast need to carry out their mission. If taxes go up under Clinton, "the tax increase wouldn't go to support the troops," she said.

When the event started, Clinton supporters moved a makeshift wall with "Hillary for President" placards all over it in front of Houston and others, effectively blocking the protesters from Clinton's sight.

By John Ellis, Fresno Bee, October 23, 2007

It's official - Hillary Clinton is dominating the presidential campaign. In both parties. Oh, sure, the Republican candidates took time in last night's debate to highlight the differences among them, but only as a way to argue over which of them is best suited to take on the Democratic frontrunner in the general election.

Long a favorite target of Republicans, Clinton has come under fire of late from competitors in her own party as well. Barack Obama, John Edwards and others seeking to knock her off stride argue that their party can't afford to return to the politics of the 1990s, that Clinton is not representative of the kind of change voters are looking for in this high-stakes election and that her record is one of political convenience over principle. Most of all, they say, Hillary Clinton is too polarizing to be elected.

Her stature and history is something that Clinton has managed to turn to into a positive on the stump and all the attention is playing right into her hands. Campaigning in Iowa over the weekend, Clinton subtly made the point. "There's been a lot of cumulated attacks on me going back 15 years," she said. "And what I've done on this campaign is to get out and have people form their own opinions of me and slowly, but surely, I think, sort of reverse some of the unfounded feelings people had about me." It's a less-than-subtle reminder that, despite years spent as a political lightening rod, the Clintons win elections.

And, becoming the focus of the GOP primary battle only serves to help Clinton's seeming inevitability. Republican candidates are clearly counting on Clinton to do something they have been unable to do - unite and excite their party's base. But there's little evidence it's working. Clinton has been the presumptive front-runner more or less since the race began last winter and yet GOP enthusiasm remains low by all indications. While Clinton, Obama and others amass huge war chests, Republican candidates are struggling to open the wallets of formerly generous givers.

The betting among some is that once the Republican nominee emerges, the party will unite in opposition to Clinton. Whether or not that happens remains to be seen. But for the moment, the focus on her candidacy is only helping to make her nomination seem all the more preordained.




By Vaughn Ververs, CBS News, October 22, 2007

So here's a puzzle. If Rudolph W. Giuliani is leading the Republican field in the national polls, and Mitt Romney is leading the field in the early states, why is John McCain running closer to Hillary Clinton than the rest of the pack?

All the Republicans would lose to Mrs. Clinton if the election were held today, according to the ongoing poll analysis by realclearpolitics.com. But Mr. McCain does better than anyone against her in the hypothetical one-on-one match-ups.

He loses to her by 3.3 points. Mr. Giuliani is very close - he would lose by 4 points, which is insignificant but enough for Mr. McCain to claim bragging rights. Mr. Romney would lose to Mrs. Clinton by 10.3 points. Fred Thompson would lose by 11.7 points.

And yet in national polls, Mr. McCain is basically tied for third with Mr. Romney, trailing Mr. Giuliani and Mr. Thompson. What accounts for this? What advantages does Mr. McCain bring against Mrs. Clinton that he doesn't bring in match-ups against his rivals?

We turned to Mark McKinnon, a top strategist for Mr. McCain, for the campaign's view.

He said that part of the answer was Mr. McCain's appeal to independents and conservative Democrats. He also said that many people viewed Mr. McCain as having "moral authority on the war and huge national security standing, and we're still in a national-security framework."

But if that is the case, why isn't Mr. McCain doing better against his fellow Republicans? Mr. McKinnon, who worked for George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004, said that right now, voters are not looking at issues as much as they are looking at "leadership" and all the attributes that "leadership" encompasses. "When they look at McCain and Rudy Giuliani, it's those attributes of a strong leader that they are looking at," he said, which is why Mr. Giuliani, who has been running on his leadership of New York during 9/11, is polling better now than Mr. McCain. But Mr. McKinnon added that Republican voters are just temporarily "parked" and have not settled on a candidate. They left Mr. McCain after the immigration debate when they thought his candidacy was no longer viable, he said. They still like and respect him and as soon as they think he's viable again - "which they're doing right now," Mr. McKinnon said - they'll be back.

We also checked in with Q. Whitfield Ayres, a Republican pollster who is not aligned with any candidate.

He agreed that Mr. McCain's strength against Mrs. Clinton comes largely from independents. And he said his name identification helps him in a general-election match-up.

As for why Mr. McCain does less well against his fellow Republicans, Mr. Ayres said: "He has taken some positions on campaign finance reform and illegal immigration that many Republicans find discomforting." At the same time, he said, "Republicans like to talk a lot about how they want a candidate who governs by principle rather than polls, and John McCain is the poster boy for governing by principle rather than polls, specifically on Iraq and illegal immigration."

By Katharine Q. Seelye, The New York Times, October 22, 2007

The latest Gallup poll had Clinton at 50 percent, followed by Senator Barack Obama of Illinois at 21 percent and former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina at 13 percent. The five other Democratic contenders trail well behind.

Clinton's lead in the polls has grown in recent months, as the pace of the campaign begins to accelerate.

"Well, if you are ready for change, I am ready to lead, and this country is desperate for leadership," she said.

Most political experts say Clinton appears well on her way to the Democratic Party nomination, even though the selection process will not begin until early January.

"At the moment, it is a very skillful campaign, and if it keeps up, she will be the nominee," said Stephen Wayne, a political scientist at Georgetown University in Washington. "Her numbers have not dropped. They have, in fact, gotten larger over the course of the campaign."

"She is very disciplined and solid on the campaign trail," said Allan Lichtman, a presidential historian at American University in Washington. "She has an enormous lead in the polls, and she has almost universal name recognition. And, I think, there is an increasing clamor in the country to see a woman nominated as president."

Clinton has improved her poll numbers in some of the early presidential contest states, as well. She leads in Iowa and New Hampshire, the two states that traditionally begin the nominee selection process for both major political parties in January.

"You see a much more stable race," said Dante Scala, an expert on the New Hampshire primary at the University of New Hampshire. "You have got Hillary Clinton with a wide lead at this point, and what has been surprising to me is how well the Clinton campaign has weathered the rigors of being the frontrunner."

Despite her formidable lead in the polls, Hillary Clinton remains a polarizing figure in national politics. Some Democrats worry that independent voters and moderate Republicans will be reluctant to support her if she becomes the Democratic nominee.

Expert Stephen Wayne says some of Clinton's Democratic rivals have raised this concern during the campaign. "To campaign on the fact that she is the only Democrat who might not be electable -"She has very high negatives [approval ratings], fairly or unfairly, and if the Democrats want a winner, they should stick with someone who does not have those high negatives.' I do not think that is going to be a very appealing argument for Democratic activists," he said.

Clinton has been able to fend off a strong challenge from Senator Obama, a relative newcomer to the national political stage. Obama has been Clinton's equal in fundraising, and is trying to appeal to Democrats searching for a fresh face in 2008.

"Barack Obama, who is in second place in the polls, has sparked a lot of enthusiasm and done extremely well in fundraising, but he has yet to give the American people a solid rationale as to why they should reject Hillary Clinton," said Historian Allan Lichtman. "And, I think, there is a feeling that he may not be quite ready, and that he is a future, rather than a present presidential candidate."

Lichtman says Clinton has angered some anti-war Democrats by not promising an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq if she is elected. But Lichtman also says disputes among the Democratic contenders over Iraq and U.S. relations with Iran are not likely to threaten Clinton's chances of winning the nomination. "I think she certainly has some vulnerability with respect to liberal Democratic base voters when it comes to her policy on Iraq and Iran," he said. "But without going relentlessly negative, it is going to be very difficult for any of her rivals to exploit that, and, at this point, none of them seem quite ready to wage a mostly negative campaign."

There is polling evidence that Democrats may be willing to rally around Clinton as the Democratic candidate best able to counter Republican attacks in the general election.

"Democrats up here in New Hampshire are as aggressive and hungry for more victories than they have been since I have been up here," said University of New Hampshire expert Dante Scala. "And so, I think they are looking for who can carry the banner the best."

Despite Clinton's apparent strength, experts caution it would be foolish to declare a winner before the primaries and caucuses even begin.

In 2004, Howard Dean was the early Democratic frontrunner, but his leads in Iowa and New Hampshire evaporated in a matter of weeks, and John Kerry quickly surged to the party nomination.

Democrats will formally nominate their candidates for president and vice-president at their national convention in late August in Denver, Colorado.

By Jim Malone, VOA, October 22, 2007

If campaign spending is any measure of political activity, then Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are all in a race to see whose wallet is open the widest.

Spending reports filed by the presidential campaigns for the July to September quarter show that Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Obama and Mr. Romney are all spending about equally. Mrs. Clinton slightly leads the pack with expenses of $22.6 million, compared with $21.5 million for Mr. Obama and $21.3 million for Mr. Romney.

But behind those numbers are wide differences in how the campaigns spend their money. And that provides a glimpse into the different strategies of their campaigns, and the financial challenges each candidate faces.

With the early primaries less than three months away, all candidates have been spending money almost as fast as they can raise it. The Democratic presidential hopefuls as a group raised $66 million in the third quarter, and spent $67 million. Republican presidential candidates took in $57 million in the quarter and spent $52 million.

Since the beginning of the year, Democratic presidential candidates have spent $133 million, while taking in $244 million. Republicans have spent just about the same - $132.4 million - but raised less, $175 million.

On the Democratic side, just as Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama are battling for the top position in the polls, so are they in spending.

Mrs. Clinton, who raised $23 million over the summer that she can use for the primaries, increased her payroll spending by $2 million, or more than 50 percent, from the second quarter to reach $5.8 million. That reflects an increase in the number of people on her staff. Mr. Obama, who trailed her summer fund-raising total by about $3 million, increased payroll by less than $1 million. But the Obama payroll reached $5.9 million in the third quarter, up from $5 million in the previous quarter. Unlike Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Obama built up an in-house staff early on and has relied on these salaried employees far more than outside consultants.

In fact, Mr. Obama spent only $332,418 on consultants in the third quarter, compared with $1.3 million for Mrs. Clinton - and far less than Mr. Romney, who spent $4.3 million, and Mr. Giuliani, who spent $2.3 million.

One big-ticket consultant for Mrs. Clinton was Penn Schoen & Berland Associates, which received just over $1 million for the quarter. The firm is headed by Mark Penn, a top Democratic pollster and chief strategist to the Clinton campaign.

The biggest cost increases for Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton came for media, polling and voter contact. Of the two, the Clinton campaign spent more, increasing its spending to $6.7 million in the third quarter from $1.9 million in the April-to-June quarter, a 240 percent increase. In the same time period, Mr. Obama almost doubled his spending in this category to $8.4 million, from $4.5 million.

Mr. Obama is going through money as fast as he can take it in. In the third quarter he spent $1.04 for every $1 he raised. In comparison, Mrs. Clinton spent only 83 cents for every dollar she raised. John Edwards, who raised $7.1 million for the quarter but spent $8.2 million, was spending at a rate of $1.17 for every dollar raised in the third quarter.

One big savings for Mr. Edwards is his use of the private jet of Fred Baron, a trial attorney, who is allowed to charge the campaign discount rates. Mr. Edwards paid Mr. Baron $234,000 for the use of his jet. Mrs. Clinton used chartered jets, which cost more, and paid $1 million.

The two top wage-earners on the Clinton campaign were Jonathan Mantz, the campaign's new finance director and fund-raiser, who earned $72,000 in the three-month period, bringing his earnings so far to $138,000. The next highest was Clinton's new Iowa director, Teresa Vilmain, who received $56,000 for the quarter.

Mr. Obama's spending reflects his Web-heavy campaign. The highest-paid employee was Joseph Rospars, the new media director, who earned $40,000 in the three months, on top of the $30,000 previously earned. Mr. Rospars is a founder of Blue State Digital, which works with Democratic candidates on Web-based campaigns. GMMB, a Washington strategic consulting firm, was paid $3.3 million in the quarter, and an additional $1.2 million went to Integral Resources, a telemarketing fund-raising firm.

On the Republican side, Mr. Romney continues to be the candidate who has raised the most, spent the most and is the most in debt. In the third quarter, Mr. Romney made an interest-free loan of $8.5 million to his campaign. This was the second big interest-free loan Mr. Romney had made, bringing his personal campaign-related debt to $17.4 million. With that loan, Mr. Romney raised $18.4 million for the quarter, and spent $1.14 for every dollar raised. Had Mr. Romney not made that loan, his campaign's third-quarter expenses would have equaled $2.20 for each third-quarter dollar he raised. One of Mr. Romney's biggest expenses was the $6.1 million paid to Midnight Ride Media, a firm based in Virginia founded by Alex Castellanos, a veteran of five Republican presidential campaigns, along with other leading Republican strategists. This firm oversees the Romney campaign's advertising, production and media buying. Mr. Romney also spent $5.4 million in the actual production of his advertisements.

Mr. Giuliani spent $1.5 million for direct-mail services from Olsen & Shuvalov, a firm based in Austin, Tex., that was founded by Karl Rove and was paid an estimated $35 million by various Bush-Cheney committees in 2004. The firm is also known for attack advertisements on Democratic candidates that have aided Republicans in many tight races.

On the payroll side, Mr. Romney's highest-paid employee is Karen Hammond, a Utah fund-raiser who earned $60,000 to bring her total earnings from the campaign to $202,000. Among the biggest earners in the quarter on the Giuliani campaign was Frederick Ahearn, the deputy campaign manager, who earned $44,000 to bring his total earnings to $82,000.

While nearly every candidate is spending more, one candidate is spending less in a deliberate plan to salvage his bid.

John McCain, who raised $5 million in the third quarter and had $1.7 million on hand at the end of September, as well as $1.7 million in debt, cut $1.5 million from his consulting costs in the third quarter, bringing them to $1.2 million, or half of what was spent in the previous three-month period. Similarly, he cut media, polling and voter outreach by half, to $1.4 million in the third quarter from $2.9 million in the second quarter. His administrative and operating expenses fell to $342,000 from $1.9 million - a drop of more than 80 percent.

By Leslie Wayne and Aron Pilhofer, The New York Times, October 22, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton is slightly ahead of a Republican presidential hopeful in the United States, according to a poll by Opinion Research Corporation released by CNN. 49 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in next year's election, while 47 per cent would support former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani.

In a separate contest, former U.S. vice-president Al Gore-who has repeatedly stated he will not seek the Democratic Party's nomination in 2008-holds a six-point advantage over Giuliani.

Yesterday, Giuliani met with members of the Family Research Council and said: "Isn't it better that I tell you what I really believe than I change my positions to fit the prevailing winds? I believe trust is better than 100 per cent agreement. (...) People of faith should not be marginalized in our civic debates. Believers have every right to participate in our political process. I believe America is better for you expressing your views."

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, October 21, 2007

Going into Iowa, she's the one to beat - if anyone can

WASHINGTON - Can anybody stop Hillary Clinton?

The former first lady appears to be pulling away from her rivals in the Democratic presidential contest. Many analysts seem to have all but conceded the nomination to her.

"The only people who are skeptical about it are the people who have actually been through this Iowa and New Hampshire business in the past," says Bill Carrick, a veteran of those campaign battlefields.

One year ago, few would have expected Clinton to hold such a commanding advantage. She'd been booed by liberal activists, months earlier, because of her stance on the Iraq war, the single most important issue to Democratic primary voters.

There were many unknowns surrounding her candidacy: Would undecided Democrats warm to her personally? Was she was too polarizing to win a general election? How might voters feel about the prospect of the Clinton soap opera returning to their TV screens?

Then there was Barack Obama, an appealing newcomer with an outsider image. He grabbed the fancy of younger voters, and the news media, with a fresh style and an eloquent, if rather vague, message of change. The money poured in, eclipsing even Clinton's haul. Some of the party's most consequential figures - Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, Chris Dodd - also joined the race. Clearly, they weren't intimidated by the sound of the Clinton machine revving up.

Since then, to the surprise of many, Clinton has consistently outclassed her rivals in debates, run a ruthlessly efficient campaign operation, overtaken Obama in money-raising, successfully wooed voters in the early states - with her husband at her side at key moments - and answered concerns about her "electability" by besting the Republican contenders in theoretical poll matchups.

Most crucial of all, perhaps, she has, thus far, navigated the treacherous cross-currents of the one issue that seemed most likely to trip her up: the Iraq war.

Despite her vote for the use of force against Iraq and her support for the war effort - part of a calculated attempt to ease doubts about a female commander in chief - she has come to be seen as the candidate best able to end the war, according to the polls, even among those for whom the war is the most important issue.

That's particularly important in Iowa, a state where liberal, anti-war activists have historically played a pivotal role in presidential politics.

Less than three months before the voting begins, what was once a wide-open nomination contest is now looking much less so.

With recent polls showing her gaining in Iowa, Clinton could effectively end the nomination race earlier than ever before, with a one-two punch in Iowa and New Hampshire.

If she wins those kickoff contests, "it'll go like a hot knife through butter" the rest of the way, predicts Tad Devine, one of the party's leading authorities on the nominating process. In 2000 and 2004, Al Gore and John Kerry, both of whom Devine advised, were similarly unstoppable after victories in the first two states. Next year's calendar, more compressed than ever before, will make it even more difficult to stop Clinton if she's on a roll.

Recent opinion surveys in Iowa, where the race is still very competitive, show that she has become the top choice of likely caucus-goers. But Iowa polls are notoriously unreliable, and the outcome often isn't decided until the final few weeks, when a large number of voters make up their minds.

At this point in the race four years ago, it looked like a two-way contest between Dick Gephardt, the front-runner in Iowa, and Howard Dean, widely viewed as the all-but-certain nominee. John Kerry, who would eventually win the caucuses, was fading fast, while John Edwards, who finished a very close second in Iowa, was last among the serious contenders, with just 5 percent in the Iowa polls.

Writing in USA Today, columnist Walter Shapiro cautioned that it was "premature to write Kerry's or anyone else's epitaph," since the caucuses were still two months away. Then, reflecting conventional wisdom at the time, he went on to predict: "Nothing is likely to eliminate Dean from the race before the convention, save perhaps for a shocking revelation that he is an undercover agent for the Republican National Committee. As for Kerry and Edwards, they are primarily battling for the limited bragging rights that accompany a third-place finish in Iowa."

Then Iowans voted, Dean screamed and the nomination, very quickly, was Kerry's.

The other day, Clinton's chief strategist, Mark Penn, may have failed to convince a room full of political reporters when he said, repeatedly, that the Clinton campaign is taking nothing for granted. But he did offer a telling analogy of the way presidential politics really operates, comparing it to video games where, "no matter what happens to your character, you just hit the reset button and off they go again."

In the coming days or weeks, something - an attack by an opponent, a slip by the surefooted Clinton, or some external incident - may crack, if not shatter, the force-field of inevitability that surrounds the senator from New York, and reset the race.

Perhaps the two-thirds of Iowa Democrats who now support someone other than Clinton will coalesce behind a single challenger, denying her the caucus victory that may be the only thing standing between her and the nomination.

Of course she can be stopped. At least for the moment, though, it's advantage, Hillary.




By Paul West, Baltimore Sun, October 21, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Hillary Rodham Clinton remains the frontrunner in the national race for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination in the United States, according to a poll by Opinion Research Corporation released by CNN. 51 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in a 2008 primary, up five points in a month.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 21 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 15 per cent. Support is lower for New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich, Delaware senator Joe Biden, former Alaska senator Mike Gravel, and Connecticut senator Chris Dodd.

On Oct. 16, Gravel expressed dissatisfaction with the current frontrunner, saying, "I'm more of a legitimate candidate than Hillary Clinton will ever be. (Anyone who supported the Iraq war) is not fit to be president of the United States because it shows a moral deficiency."

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Hillary Rodham Clinton is the top Democratic Party presidential hopeful in Iowa, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. 33 per cent of Democratic caucus voters in the Hawkeye State will back the New York senator next year.

Former North Carolina senator John Edwards is second with 22 per cent, followed by Illinois senator Barack Obama with 21 per cent, New Mexico governor Bill Richardson with nine per cent, and Delaware senator Joe Biden with four per cent.

In the sample of Republican Party supporters, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney is first with 25 per cent, followed by actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson with 19 per cent, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee with 18 per cent, and former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani with 13 per cent. Support is lower for Arizona senator John McCain, Kansas senator Sam Brownback, Colorado congressman Tom Tancredo, Texas congressman Ron Paul, and California congressman Duncan Hunter.

Since 1976, the Iowa caucus has kicked off the process of finding presidential nominees for the two major political parties in the United States. The caucus differs from a presidential primary because the casting of ballots in favour of a particular candidate is preceded by a "gathering of neighbours" where specific platform issues are discussed.

In 2004, Massachusetts senator John Kerry won the Democratic Iowa caucus with 38 per cent, followed by Edwards with 32 per cent, former Vermont governor Howard Dean with 18 per cent, Missouri congressman Dick Gephardt with 11 per cent, and Kucinich with one per cent. Incumbent president George W. Bush won the Republican caucus unopposed.

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, October 21, 2007

Carroll, Ia. - Hillary Clinton, during a three-town swing through Iowa on Saturday, said her strategy is to reach as many Iowa voters as possible in an effort to shatter negative perceptions about her.

It's a theory her campaign has long recognized: Clinton does a better job of winning over voters when they see her in person.

"There's been a lot of cumulated attacks on me going back 15 years, and what I've done on this campaign is to get out and have people form their own opinions of me and slowly, but surely, I think, sort of reverse some of the unfounded feelings people had about me," Clinton told reporters after a rally at Oak Park Elementary School in Des Moines.

Clinton, whose 60th birthday is Friday, said she is well aware that both Republican and Democratic opponents have zeroed in on her with their criticism. "I have been reminded by some of my friends," she said, "that when you get to be my age, having so many men pay attention to you is kind of flattering."

As if to reinforce the idea that she's sunny and approachable, Clinton did a public question-and-answer session with her Des Moines audience, then later with reporters. Asked if she feels like she is the front-runner in Iowa, Clinton firmly answered, "No," then addressed complaints that the media have crowned her the Democratic nominee.

"I'm well aware that no one has voted. No one has caucused. We have a long way to go before that happens," she said. "I feel I get up every day and run as hard as I can imagine. I like to feel as though I'm running 10 or 20 points behind and try to reach out and earn the support of as many Iowans as possible."

Clinton then went on to express confidence in her "winning campaign," which she takes to Las Vegas and Los Angeles today, then Seattle and Denver this week.

"I'm very pleased, I am doing so well everywhere in the country that I've opened up some real distance between me and the Republican nominees at this point in the campaign, that I have by far the greatest number of endorsements from my colleagues - they're from red states, big states, small states," she told reporters.

Clinton's campaign staff is banking that women will feel an emotional connection with a female presidential nominee. Chief strategist Mark Penn has told reporters that 94 percent of young women say they are more likely to vote if a woman is on the ballot. And Penn wrote in his blog that he predicts that as many as 24 percent of Republican women would defect and vote for Clinton in the general election.

Republican Joan Bruning of Carroll came with "an open mind" to hear Clinton speak, and said she liked what the New York senator said about making college more affordable. But she isn't ready to cross over and vote for Clinton. "I think this time we really need to listen to everyone," said Bruning, a school bus driver.

Clinton answered a reporter's question about the scrutiny of questionable political donations from a fundraising event in New York's Chinatown by saying she is proud to have support from first-generation Americans. She said the campaign has returned the money already and "if new things come to light, we'll continue to do that."




By Jennifer Jacobs, Des Moines Register, October 21, 2007

WASHINGTON - This past week was the kind that the leading presidential candidates -- Hillary Rodham Clinton and Rudy Giuliani -- hope will repeat time and again through primary season.

Clinton, the Democratic senator from New York, and Giuliani, the Republican former mayor of New York City, led the pack in almost every measure that matters. They led their fields in the amount of cash their campaigns have on hand. Each remains No. 1 in every national poll. (They also tend to dominate multi-candidate debates, though there were none this week.) Clearly, at this point, they're the two to beat.

Big difference, though: Clinton's far ahead among Democrats, while Giuliani's only narrowly in the lead among Republicans, far short of a majority. And Clinton leads polls of every early voting primary and caucus state, while Giuliani trails former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney in Iowa and New Hampshire, which go first.

Voting starts in less than three months. First up: Iowa on Jan. 3 -- unless New Hampshire jumps ahead into mid-December, as it's threatening.

EXPERIENCE COUNTS

In an interview on Fox TV's "Hannity & Colmes," Giuliani challenged Clinton's claim of deep experience: "Honestly and most respectfully, I don't know Hillary's experience. She's never run a city; she's never run a state; she's never run a business; she's never met a payroll; she's never been responsible for the safety and security of millions of people, much less even hundreds of people. So I'm trying to figure out where the experience is here."

NEW IDEAS

Former Republican Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson proposed this week to cut future Medicare benefits for the wealthy. It's one way to help rescue the program's trust fund, projected to go insolvent in 2019. Earlier, Thompson proposed to cut future Social Security benefits for everyone below what the current system promises. Experts agree that both programs face future fiscal woes, but proposing to fix them by cutting benefits is politically risky.

Meanwhile, Clinton proposed to spend $1.75 billion a year subsidizing state family leave and child-care programs. The Republican National Committee said if all her proposals were enacted, they'd cost taxpayers $763 billion over a four-year term -- $440 billion for health care alone. She says she'll pay for them by rolling back President Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy.

GORE SAYS NO

In his first interview since winning the Nobel Peace Prize, Al Gore told Norway's NRK TV he won't run for president. "I'm involved in a different kind of campaign; it's a global campaign," Gore said. "It's a campaign to change the way people think about the climate crisis."

BROWNBACK SAYS NO GO

Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas abandoned his long-shot quest for the Republican nomination on Friday. He was at 1 percent in the polls and raised less than $1 million in the third quarter. A strong social conservative, he was edged aside for their loyalty of late by Baptist preacher and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who's inching up.

SHOW US THE MONEY

The latest fundraising reports show who's got the most cash on hand as primary voting draws near.

DEMOCRATS: Clinton's got $35 million; Obama $31.9 million; Edwards $9.8 million; Bill Richardson $5.2 million. The rest: chickenfeed.

REPUBLICANS: Giuliani's got $11.5 million; Romney $9.2 million; Thompson $7.1 million; Ron Paul $5.4 million; John McCain $1.6 million. The rest: fuhgeddaboudit.

LATEST POLL

CNN's national poll Tuesday ranked them this way:

DEMOCRATS: Clinton 46 percent, Obama 23 percent, Edwards 15 percent, Richardson 4 percent, and 1 percent each for Joe Biden, Christopher Dodd, Mike Gravel, and Dennis Kucinich. Democratic poll's margin of error: 4.5 percentage points.

REPUBLICANS: Giuliani 27 percent, Thompson 19 percent, McCain 17 percent, Romney 13 percent, Huckabee 5 percent, Duncan Hunter 3 percent, Paul 2 percent, and 1 percent each for Brownback and Tom Tancredo. GOP poll's margin of error: 5 percentage points.

But national polls mean little at this stage. Once primary states vote, national standings scramble fast. Remember Howard Dean?

THIS WEEK

Republican candidates debate today in Orlando. Democrats scatter across the land.

By Robert A. Rankin, The News & Observer, October 21, 2007

WASHINGTON (AFP) - A compressed, chaotic and changeable election calendar is forcing campaign managers in the frenetic 2008 White House chase to tear up decades of battle-tested political war plans.

New Hampshire and Iowa, small, largely rural states, peopled mainly by whites and few minorities have traditionally kicked off modern US election campaigns, with their fabled primary and caucus nominating contests.

But for 2008, more diverse and populous states like California, Michigan and Florida have tried to muscle in on the quirky state-by-state process used to select US presidential nominees. "It is, for students of politics, and political practitioners, an exciting time, because all bets are off on the traditional wisdom," said Dan Shea, professor of political science at Allegheny College, Pennsylvania.

Democratic candidates like Hillary Clinton and Republicans like Rudolph Giuliani, can't even be sure yet when they will have to submit their cherished presidential dreams to voters for the first time.

As it stands, Iowa Republicans last week scheduled their first nominating contests, the fabled caucuses, for January 3 -- much earlier than normal. Democrats in the key midwestern state are still officially holding their equivalent on January 14 -- but that is likely to be moved forward.

The other key question is New Hampshire -- which holds a "first in the nation" primary contest, and had been expected to settle on a date in January. The state's secretary of state, Bill Gardner, is currently holding the US political world in thrall, as he deliberates on a date -- and some analysts believe he could even hold the contest in December.

That would mean panic stations for campaigns, and make history, with voters going to the polls for the first time in a calendar year before a US general election -- set for one date which assuredly will not move, November 4, 2008.

"Because the calendar is not yet fixed, the strategies are constantly in flux," said Costas Panagopoulos, of the Elections and Campaign management program at Fordham University. Currently, campaign strategists are having to guess on when to book television advertising blitzes, shower voters with candidate mail, schedule campaign appearances and crank up vital 'get-out-the-vote' operations.

US elections were once a leisurely process which began in the ice and snow of Iowa and New Hampshire and progressed through the country, state-by-state and often wound up in the summer heat, in places like California.

But the calendar has been narrowing in recent election cycles.

This year, the crush of contests in January, leads to a "tsunami Tuesday" on February 5, when at least 21 states will hold what is in effect, a national primary, which many experts believe will effectively crown two nominees.

"All of the candidates are aware that they could be out of the race by February," said Julian Zelizer, professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University.

Another complicating factor is the fact that the Iowa Republican caucuses taking place just three days into the year, just after the traditionally quiet Christmas and New Year holidays. That has led to wisecracks about Santa's sack bulging with election literature, and the prospect of families having traditional viewings of James Stewart's classic holiday fable "It's a Wonderful Life" being punctuated by hard-hitting negative campaign ads by snarling 'Grinch-like' politicians.

"If candidates are compelled to promote themselves heavily during the Christmas holidays, it does run the risk of turning off voters who want to focus on spending time with their families," said Panagopoulos.

By Stephen Collinson, AFP, October 20, 2007

Gov. Jennifer Granholm and Lt. Gov. John Cherry endorsed Sen. Hillary Clinton for president today.

The endorsement didn't come as a surprise, especially after all of the other front-running Democrats decided to withdraw from Michigan's presidential primary ballot last week because the state moved up its primary election date in violation of national Democratic Party rules.

Clinton, along with Christopher Dodd and Mike Gravel will appear on the Jan. 15 primary ballot. Dennis Kucinich is trying to withdraw his name. Sens. Barack Obama and Joe Biden, former Sen. John Edwards and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson have withdrawn their names from the Michigan primary ballot.

Granholm cited Clinton's commitment to ending the war in Iraq and implementing fair trade policies as reasons to support the former First Lady.

The endorsement is the first to come from the top elected officials in the state. Attorney General Mike Cox had endorsed Republican Sen. John McCain for president, but withdrew that support earlier this year. Republican Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land has not endorsed a candidate yet.

By Kathleen Gray, Detroit Free Press, October 19, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - More Democratic Party backers in the United States are voicing support for Hillary Rodham Clinton, according to a poll by American Research Group. 45 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in a 2008 presidential primary, up six points in a month.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 20 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 13 per cent. Support is lower for Delaware senator Joe Biden, New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich, and Connecticut senator Chris Dodd.

On Oct. 16, Edwards criticized Rodham Clinton, saying, "Have we decided who the nominee's going to be? Have you decided? Instead of having 'primary mode' or 'general-election mode,' how about we have 'telling-the-truth mode'?"

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, October 18, 2007

WASHINGTON - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton said Thursday that immigrants living in the U.S. illegally would not be covered by her proposed universal health care plan.

The New York senator said she supports basic health services for illegal immigrants, including hospitalization and treatment of acute conditions. But she said the magnitude of the nation's health care challenge means her universal coverage proposal would not cover the 12 million people living in the country illegally.

"People who are here legally deserve some better treatment and acceptance in the law than people who are not here legally," she said. "These are hard choices."

As for ways to reduce pressure on the overburdened health care system, she said she could envision using "carrots and maybe a few sticks" to motivate people to lose weight and make other behavioral changes that could help.

Speaking at a forum sponsored by several health care organizations, Clinton addressed a range of questions on the future of Social Security and Medicare, racial and gender disparities in health care coverage and ways to encourage medical students to become primary care doctors rather than specialists.

Most of all, there were questions about her proposed $110 billion health care plan and how it would bring order to a fractured system.

She didn't directly address questions of whether smokers or obese people should pay more for health care but said as president she would use the "bully pulpit" to encourage healthy lifestyle choices, particularly among young people.

Clinton, who has publicly fretted about her weight, drew laughs as she recalled competing for presidential physical fitness awards as a child.

"We were rounded up and taken to the gym where we had to jump and run. I was horrible at it. They kept telling me to run and I'd say, 'I'm running,'" she said. "It was a very strong message to children that the president cares about your health care. I personally believed Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy were sitting in the White House signing my certificate."

The former first lady also spoke about her failure to enact universal coverage during her husband's presidency, assuring audience members that she would not repeat the mistakes that doomed that effort. Among other things, she said it had been a mistake to try and draft the plan out of the White House, and that as president she had no intention producing the specific legislation for Congress to consider.

"I'm setting goals for the country. But I know how important it is to work out the details in consultation with the Congress," she said.

Clinton scoffed at suggestions from Republican presidential rivals that her plan is little more than socialized medicine, calling them "old, tired accusations." But she acknowledged the need to bring a broad spectrum of interests together in order to enact her proposed plan.

"I think we'll have a very strong coalition that will be able to make the case to Congress," she said. "Nobody will come out of this process with 100 percent of what he or she wants."

Clinton also said the task would be made easier if more Democrats were elected to the Senate in 2008.

"It's one of my highest priorities," she said.

By Beth Fouhy, Associated Press, October 18, 2007

HARTFORD - Connecticut voters are torn between Sen. Hillary Clinton and Rudolph W. Giuliani, the former New York City mayor, in the 2008 presidential race, according to the latest Quinnipiac University Poll.

Within their political parties, both Clinton and Giuliani are far ahead of Democratic U.S. Sen. Barack Obama and Republican Sen. John McCain, respectively. But in a head-to-head matchup for the White House, they are virtually a statistical deadlock.

Clinton is up 43 percent to 16 percent for Obama, while Giuliani is ahead of McCain, 42 percent to 14 percent. Clinton is ahead by a razor-thin 2 percent on Giuliani in the state, according to the polling of 1,391 registered Connecticut voters.

Back in May, Clinton was only 8 points ahead of Obama.

Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., lags far behind, with a mere 7 percent in his home state, the Q Poll found as part of a New York, Connecticut and New Jersey tri-state survey of more than 1,400 voters.

"We found in Connecticut that Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani have overwhelming leads in their respective primaries for the nomination," said Douglas Schwartz, the university's poll director. He said Clinton's 2-point lead over Giuliani makes it "too close to call" at this point.

"The good news for her is that she was trailing Giuliani by six points in the last poll in May," Schwartz said. "The good news for Giuliani is that Connecticut is a blue state and he's showing that he can put this blue state into play, if he is the Republican nominee."

He said that the numbers are important for Giuliani because of the delegate counts. "You add together New York, New Jersey and Connecticut and they make up 15 percent of the delegates needed to win the nominations for the Republicans," Schwartz said. "These are winner-take-all states, so Giuliani has such an overwhelming lead, more than 25 points in all three states, that it looks like he'll be able to win 15 percent of the delegates."

For Clinton, even if she wins the primary, Obama would be allowed an allocation of Democratic delegates depending on his support on primary day.

Connecticut, New Jersey, New York and 17 other states have presidential primaries scheduled for February 5. Clinton and Giuliani have similar leads in New York and New Jersey, although Fred Thompson, the conservative former U.S. senator and TV actor, is in second place among Republicans in New York and New Jersey, the poll found.

Schwartz said Dodd's flimsy 7 percent support indicates the strength of Clinton. "As the next-door neighbor, voters are preferring her over their native son," Schwartz said to reporters in the Capitol. "And it's also saying that they want Dodd to stay in the Senate."

By Ken Dixon, The Connecticut Post, October 17, 2007

The first Rasmussen Reports poll of the Iowa Democratic Caucus for 2008 finds Senator Hillary Clinton on top with support from 33% of Likely Caucus Participants. Former North Carolina Senator John Edwards is supported by 22% and Illinois Senator Barack Obama attracts 21%. New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson is at 7% in the poll followed by Delaware Senator Joe Biden at 4%.

Clinton has a substantial lead among women, attracting 39% of the female vote. She has a much smaller advantage among men, leading Edwards just 28% to 24%.

Among political liberals likely to participate, Clinton earns 29% of the vote while Obama attracts 24%. A recent national survey found that 40% of Democratic voters see Obama as politically liberal. Only 29% say the same of Clinton.

Obama is strongest among upper income participants, those earning at least $75,000 a year. Clinton does best among those earning less than $40,000 a year. As for those between those extremes, Edwards is preferred by 29%, Clinton by 28%, and Obama by 21%.

Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Clinton supporters say they are certain they will vote for her. Fifty-one percent (51%) of Edwards' supporters say the same about him and 48% of Obama's voters are that confident. Given the high numbers of voters who say they could change their mind, the race in Iowa remains very fluid.

Nationally, Clinton has a commanding lead in the polls. Her growing lead is one of three trends currently defining the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination. Clinton also leads in New Hampshire and South Carolina.

Eighty-two percent (82%) of Likely Caucus Participants have a favorable opinion of Clinton and the same number offer a positive assessment of Edwards. Obama is viewed favorably by 78%, Richardson by 63%, and Biden by 51%.

Eighty-nine percent (89%) of Likely Democratic Caucus Participants believe the Democrats will win the White House in 2008. Only 5% disagree. That's a far greater level of confidence than is found among Republican caucus participants.

Ninety percent (90%) of the caucus Democrats want to see troops home from Iraq within a year. That figure includes 34% who want the troops withdrawn immediately. Nationally, 64% of Americans want the troops out of Iraq within a year.

Among Democratic caucus participants, 40% believe America's best days are in the future. Forty-four percent (44%) say the best days have already come and gone.

All polling for caucus events presents challenges in determining who is likely to show up and participate. In conducting and analyzing this survey, Rasmussen Reports reviewed results for many possible levels of turnout. While the results varied modestly depending upon the turnout model, the overall dynamic was the same in all cases. Clinton in the lead with Edwards and Obama close to each other in second. For example, our overall sample shows Clinton with 33% of the vote and an eleven point lead. When only those who were absolutely certain they would vote, Clinton attracts 31% support and leads by eight.

This telephone survey of 1,007 Likely Democratic Primary Voters was conducted by Rasmussen Reports October 10 & 14, 2007. The margin of sampling error for the is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

Rasmussen Reports, October 17, 2007

Who are these folks who get to make that big decision?

Next year more than ever, the fate of the nation may lie in the hands of a small group of Iowa voters -- a group roughly equal to the population of Akron, Ohio. Mitt Romney and John Edwards may be finished if they don't win in Iowa. Michelle Obama suggested a loss in Iowa could mean the end of her husband's campaign. "If Barack doesn't win Iowa," she warned supporters, "it is just a dream."

So who are these folks who get to make that big decision for the rest of us? How accurately do they reflect the country?

• Size: The population of Iowa is small. Very small. Just 2.9 million souls, about the size of Chicago. Iowa ranks 30th in population nationwide, and only a fraction of its citizens vote in the caucuses. In 2004, 124,000 Democrats showed up to the fiercely contested caucuses. Only 87,666 Republicans voted in the competitive GOP caucuses of 2000.
• Age: Iowa is the 12th-oldest state in the nation, with a median age of 37.8. Caucus-goers are even older. A Des Moines Register survey of likely caucus-goers released this week found 47 percent are over 55. In the Democratic caucuses of 2004, a third of the participants were over 65.
• Education: Iowans' education is on par with the rest of the nation. About one-third went beyond high school, taking some college classes or receiving degrees. But this year's likely caucus-goers are eggheads, according to the Register. Fifty-eight percent have at least some college experience. Twenty percent have a graduate degree.
• Race: Iowa is the fifth-whitest state in the country: Ninety-three percent of its citizens are white, compared to 73.9 percent nationwide.
• Income: Iowans are not, on average, richer or poorer than the rest of the country, but likely caucus-goers are. The Register reports that 36 percent have incomes of $70,000 or more.
• Occupation: Iowa has more farmers than most places. Four percent of Iowans make their living in agriculture, compared to 1 percent nationwide. Fifty-two percent of likely caucus-goers in the Register survey come from rural areas or small towns.

Iowa has other idiosyncrasies. Take the price of gas: In Iowa, mid-grade gas is cheaper than regular. That's because mid-grade fuels in Iowa are ethanol blends and -- no surprise -- Iowa grows a lot of corn.

And people who live there have access to the candidates, giving them privileged proximity to the next president. The Register poll found that one in four likely caucus-goers has met a presidential candidate in person; most of America will only see the hopefuls on TV. No matter how much (or how little) Iowans have in common with the rest of us, the primary calendar has given Iowa the whole country's proxy.

By Linda Douglass, National Journal, October 17, 2007

(The Politico) Rep. Hilda Solis, a California Democrat and prominent Latina, endorsed Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) for president today. Solis will act as co-chair of the campaign's Environmental and Energy Task Force and co-chair of the National Hispanic Leadership Council.

"I have been following all the candidates closely and I am convinced that I am choosing the candidate with the experience and strength to bring the change that America needs," Solis said in a statement. "Her commitment to promoting policies to develop alternative energy technologies and fighting global warming are only two of the many issues in which Hillary has shown her ability to lead. Sen. Clinton also has a long record of working on issues that are important to women and to Latino families, such as education, health care and economic empowerment. I look forward to working to help elect Hillary the next president of the United States."

Solis serves on the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the Natural Resources Committee. She was also recently named to the select committee handling global warming.

"I am grateful to receive Rep. Solis' support. She has been a pioneer on environmental justice issues, and an outspoken advocate on behalf of women and families," Clinton said. "Her expertise will be invaluable to my campaign and I am excited to have her on board."




By Josephine Hearn, The Politico, October 17, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton holds the upper hand in a United States presidential contest against Republican Rudy Giuliani, according to a poll by Public Opinion Strategies and Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research released by National Public Radio. 47 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator, while 44 per cent would support the former New York City mayor.

In a separate match-up, Giuliani is tied with Illinois senator Barack Obama. In addition, actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson trails Rodham Clinton by eight points, and Obama by nine points.

Yesterday, Thompson discussed how his party should prepare to face Rodham Clinton, saying, "I think we win by adhering to strong conservative principles. If we react to her and try to finesse and try to obsess about that, I think we're playing right into their hands. I think we need to concentrate on what we ought to do. It is not our candidate versus her. It is our candidate and the American people. That's what it all comes down to."

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, October 17, 2007

Mitt Romney continues to lead in Iowa, where he has invested the most time and money of the Republican presidential hopefuls, according to a new poll.

But the support for the leading candidates is not firm, with about 60 percent of backers for each saying they could change their minds before the caucus, which Iowa Republicans on Tuesday scheduled for Jan. 3.

Romney had support from 25 percent of likely caucus-goers, compared to 19 percent for Fred Thompson, 18 percent for Mike Huckabee, 13 percent for Rudy Giuliani, and 6 percent for John McCain, according to the Rasmussen Reports survey released today.

Huckabee leads among evangelical Christians, while Romney leads among other religious groups, the poll found.

On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton led with 33 percent, to 22 percent for John Edwards, 21 percent for Barack Obama, and 7 percent for Bill Richardson. Joe Biden, who said in Boston on Tuesday that he would need to finish at least fourth to stay in the race, is in fifth with 4 percent.

The poll was conducted Oct. 10-14 with a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points among 650 Republicans and plus or minus 3 percentage points among 1,007 Democrats, Rasmussen said.

By Foon Rhee, The Boston Globe, October 17, 2007

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Sen. Hillary Clinton's lead over Sen. Barack Obama, her chief rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, is growing among African-American voters who are registered Democrats, and particularly among black women, a poll said Wednesday.

Among black registered Democrats overall, Clinton had a 57 percent to 33 percent lead over Obama.

That's up from 53 percent for Clinton and 36 percent for Obama in a poll carried out in April.

The 26-point difference between black women and men underscores the fact that the nation's vote is divided not only by race, but also by gender, said CNN political analyst Bill Schneider. "Black women don't just vote their black identity," he said. "They also vote their identity as women."

Among white registered Democrats, Clinton drew 49 percent support, versus 18 percent for Obama and 17 percent for former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, the latest poll found.

The question had a sampling error of plus-or-minus 6.5 percentage points.

The former first lady's strongest support among blacks came from black women, 68 percent of whom identified her as their likely choice, versus 25 percent who cited Obama, the senator from Illinois who is African-American.

Black men who are registered Democrats were nearly evenly split, with 42 percent favoring Clinton and 46 percent favoring Obama. The sampling error of that question was plus-or-minus 8 percentage points.

Black registered Democrats also appeared more sure of themselves than did whites, with two-thirds (67 percent) of blacks saying they would definitely support whichever candidate they had said they favored, versus one-third (33 percent) who said they might change their minds.

White registered Democrats appeared more open to persuasion, with only 45 percent saying they would definitely support that person, and 54 percent saying they might change their minds.

Overall, registered white voters polled appeared nearly evenly split between the two major parties, with 45 percent saying they would definitely or probably vote for the Democratic presidential candidate, and 47 percent saying the same about the Republican presidential candidate.

That question had a sampling error of plus-or-minus 6 percentage points.

But black voters appeared overwhelmingly likely to vote Democratic, with 80 percent of them saying they were definitely or probably going to cast their vote for the party's candidate.

Just 13 percent of blacks said the same thing about the Republican candidate.

Clinton maintained an overwhelming lead among black registered voters when pitted against former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, besting the leading GOP presidential candidate 86 percent to 13 percent. But when the same question was asked of white registered voters, the senator from New York's lead vanished, with Giuliani outpolling her 57 percent to 40 percent.

That question had a sampling error of plus-or-minus 6 percentage points.

The questions were asked based on the absence of former Vice President Al Gore from the race. He has repeatedly said he has no plans to run. But, were he to change his mind, and if he won the Democratic nomination, the poll found that 52 percent of 927 registered voters queried said they would choose him versus 46 percent who cited Giuliani. Among blacks, that lead was 78 percent for Gore versus 20 percent for Giuliani.

In response to poll results showing him trailing Clinton, Obama has noted that Clinton has been a major figure in national politics for 15 years, versus just three for Obama. "The 'sistah' vote is paying off handsomely for Hillary Clinton," said Democratic political strategist Donna Brazile. "It's not only getting her the women's vote. It's also getting her the black vote."

A gender gap also exists among white Democrats, but -- at 11 points -- it is narrower.

The CNN/Opinion Research Poll of 1,212 adult Americans was carried out by telephone Friday through Sunday. The sample included interviews of 307 blacks and 762 non-Latino whites.

CNN, October 17, 2007

NEW YORK --Democrats Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards have proposed vast policy programs costing billions of dollars. Republicans Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, John McCain and Fred Thompson have vowed to extend President Bush's tax cuts and continue the multibillion-dollar wars in Iraq and Afghanistan indefinitely.

The top candidates on both sides of the 2008 presidential contest have shown their eagerness to spend tax dollars. But their priorities reflect widely differing views of the role of government in addressing complex problems.

Clinton, Obama and Edwards have embraced ambitious government programs to help provide health care and education and to conquer global warming. For the most part, Clinton and Obama have offered specific ways to fund their proposals, while Edwards has argued that running a modest federal deficit is acceptable if it means investing in health care and reducing poverty.

Giuliani, Romney, McCain and Thompson promote tax cuts and the need to rein in federal spending. They frequently deride their Democratic rivals as big spenders, but are themselves reluctant to say what they would cut to pay for tax cuts and U.S. military engagements.

Paul Weinstein, an economist at the centrist Progressive Policy Institute, argues that candidates of both parties need to adjust their rhetoric if they are to be taken seriously as responsible fiscal stewards.

"Democrats need to talk about budget cuts first -- not just things like closing corporate loopholes, but specific programs they would cut to have the money necessary for other things," he said. "Republicans need to 'fess up' about the fact that under the Republican leadership of the last six years, we've cut taxes but we've also spent more and not managed our books. Low taxes are important for growth but we also have to make a reasonable attempt to trim government."

Here's where the major candidates are on federal programs, spending and tax cuts:

DEMOCRATS:

Clinton's latest proposal, a $1 billion paid family leave program outlined Tuesday and financed by eliminating some tax shelters, comes atop several other major costly social programs she's outlined recently. But the New York senator isn't the only Democrat advocating major new federal initiatives. Obama and Edwards also have laid out multibillion-dollar programs on health care, energy independence and tax fairness.

-- HEALTH CARE: Clinton, Obama and Edwards have outlined major health insurance plans with the goal of providing universal coverage for all. Obama has estimated his would cost $50 billion-$60 billion per year, while Clinton and Edwards say theirs would cost closer to $100 billion annually. All say they would pay for the plans largely by allowing Bush's tax cuts to expire on schedule in 2010.

Clinton wants to create a $50 billion "strategic energy fund" to develop new sources of fuel and has proposed paying for it by eliminating tax subsidies for oil companies. Edwards has outlined a similar program and would eliminate the oil company subsidies as well as establish a cap-and-trade system requiring companies to pay for emitting pollution.

Obama has pledged a 10-year, $150 billion program to produce "climate friendly" energy supplies. To pay for it, he would implement a 100 percent carbon auction where businesses would have to bid competitively for the right to pollute.

-- TAX RELIEF: Obama and Edwards want to shift the income tax burden. Edwards' $25 billion per year plan would cut middle-class taxes by raising the capital gains rate on people making more than $250,000 per year. Obama's plan, projected to cost $85 billion a year, would be funded by raising the capital gains rate and closing some corporate tax loopholes.

-- RETIREMENT: With Social Security projected to run out of money in the next 40 years, Obama and Edwards say they would consider increasing the level of income that is taxed to provide benefits. To fund the system, the government currently assesses a 6.2 percent tax on incomes up to $97,500. Clinton has refused to say whether she would support that idea. But to address the issue of retirement security, she recently rolled out a $25 billion-per-year program to help individuals set up 401(k) plans by offering a federal match of up to $1,000 per person. She says she would pay for the plan by freezing the estate tax at 2009 levels.

REPUBLICANS:

-- IRAQ WAR: Giuliani, Romney, Thompson and McCain say they favor a protracted military presence in Iraq, requiring tens of billions of dollars of continued spending. The U.S. currently spends about $10 billion a month in Iraq and nearly $2 billion a month to fight terrorism in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

-- TAX CUTS: All four would preserve Bush's cuts. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated it would cost the government $2.3 trillion from between 2008 and 2017 if the expiring tax provisions were extended.

Recently, the candidates have been challenged on the issue of the alternative minimum tax. Originally introduced in 1970 over concern that wealthy families were able to avoid paying federal income taxes, the AMT has never been indexed for inflation and has begun to snag millions of middle-class taxpayers.

In a debate on economic issues last week, Thompson advocated indexing the AMT for inflation and phasing it out altogether over time. But that would cost the government $621 billion in revenue over the next 10 years, say the CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation.

Romney has said he would eliminate taxes on interest and dividends for families earning less than $200,000 annually, which the campaign says would cost $32 billion. Aides say it would be paid for through economic growth and by holding non-defense, discretionary spending to inflation minus 1 percentage point.

-- HEALTH CARE: Giuliani, McCain and Romney have proposed making health care more affordable but have avoided assigning a price tag.

McCain was the most ambitious of the three, focusing on cost containment, treating chronic diseases and providing tax subsidies to buy insurance. When he unveiled the plan last week, McCain acknowledged that he didn't know how much it would cost, but aides said it would be paid for by ending a provision in the tax code that lets employers deduct the cost of health care from their taxable earnings.

Giuliani also offered no cost estimate for his health plan, which would provide tax credits to help individuals pay for insurance rather than relying on employers to do so.

Romney has said his plan is revenue neutral. It would spend existing resources and reroute federal dollars to the states to cover the uninsured with private insurance. He has distanced himself from a major initiative passed in Massachusetts while he was governor that requires all residents to buy health insurance.

By Beth Fouhy, Associated Press, October 17, 2007

TRENTON, N.J. (AP) -- New Yorkers Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Rodham Clinton hold commanding leads on their home turf and are poised to sweep tri-state presidential primaries in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut on Feb. 5, a new poll shows.

A Quinnipiac University poll released Wednesday indicates the two leading contenders could pick up significant numbers of tri-state delegates for their respective party conventions.

Twenty states are holding presidential primaries Feb. 5, which could determine each party's nominee historically early in the process.

Giuliani and Clinton "can count on their Northeast neighbors to give them an early bumper crop of delegates," said Maurice Carroll, director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

Giuliani, a former New York City mayor, has three times the support of his nearest competitors, former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson and Arizona Sen. John McCain, for the Republican nomination in all three states, according to the poll. Giuliani leads Thompson, 45 percent to 12 percent in New York and 48-12 in New Jersey, and he tops McCain, 42-14, in Connecticut, according to the poll, which surveyed voters simultaneously in the three states. In New York, McCain is third with 9 percent. In New Jersey, he ties for third with 12 percent, and in Connecticut Thompson is third with 10 percent.

With the Republicans' winner-take-all primary rules, Giuliani could win all 183 tri-state delegates, giving him 15 percent of the 1,228 he needs to secure the nomination.

Clinton also enjoys wide leads in the three states. More than twice as many voters polled support her as her closest Democratic competitor, Ill. Sen. Barack Obama.

The New York senator leads Obama 49 percent to 12 percent in New York, 46-20 in New Jersey and 43-16 in Connecticut, according to the poll. In New York, former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards is third with 11 percent. In New Jersey, he is third with 9 percent, and in Connecticut he runs third with 8 percent, just ahead of the state's senior senator, Christopher Dodd, with 7 percent.

Because Democrats allocate primary votes proportionally, Obama and Edwards could win some tri-state delegates. But the survey indicates that Clinton could win more than half the 468 delegates at stake, giving her 250 of the 2,181 she'd need for the Democratic nomination.

In a theoretical head-to-head matchup between the Republican and Democratic front-runners, Clinton trumps Giuliani in New York, 50 percent to 36 percent. But the matchup between them in both Connecticut and New Jersey is a statistical tie, according to the poll.

The telephone poll, taken Oct. 9-15, surveyed 1,063 New York voters with a sampling error margin of plus or minus 3 percentage points. The survey included 316 New York Republicans with a sampling error margin of plus or minus 5.5 percentage points and 468 Democrats with an error margin of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points. In New Jersey, 1,004 voters were surveyed with a sampling error margin of plus or minus 3 percentage points. The survey included 301 Republicans, with a sampling error margin of plus or minus 5.5 percentage points, and 343 Democrats, at plus or minus 5.5 percentage points. In Connecticut, 1,391 voters were polled with a sampling error margin of plus or minus 2.5 percentage points, including 325 Republicans, at plus or minus 5.5 percentage points, and 530 Democrats, at plus or minus 4.5 percentage points.




Associated Press, October 17, 2007

The survey, taken Friday through Sunday, depicts a landscape for 2008 that seems to be moving toward Clinton in particular and Democrats in general. Democratic voters are more committed to and energized by their field of candidates than Republicans are.

"Democrats can count on highly motivated voters who will turn out, and the Republicans will have to create that energy from somewhere over the next year," says Mark Blumenthal, editor of the non-partisan pollster.com. But he cautions on Clinton's positive results: "These perceptions can turn around in a great big hurry if you lose an early primary."

At least for now, though, the news is almost all good for Clinton.

She continues to widen her lead over rival Barack Obama, now 50%-21%, her biggest edge since spring. Former North Carolina senator John Edwards is at 13%. What's more, two-thirds of Clinton's supporters say they are "certain to support" her.

Fewer than half of the supporters of any other candidate in either party are firmly committed.

For Clinton, reaching the threshold of 50% support may have some value. Only once has a presidential candidate received as much as 50% support in a Gallup Poll and then gone on to lose his party's nomination. That was Massachusetts Sen. Edward Kennedy in 1980.

"Some of the other campaigns have tried negative strategies that have backfired while she has continued to be out there saying where she wants to take the country," says Mark Penn, Clinton's chief strategist. Obama has sharpened his criticism of Clinton's judgment in voting to authorize the Iraq invasion in 2002, and Edwards has faulted her recent vote to designate Iran's Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist organization.

Former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani continues to lead the GOP field at 32%. Former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson has 18%, Arizona Sen. John McCain 14%, and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney 10%. Still, 53% of Republicans say they "might change their mind" about which candidate to support.

In the survey, Democrats benefit from an enthusiasm gap. Regardless of whom they support, 64% of Democrats say they would "enthusiastically" vote for Clinton as the nominee; 49% say that of Obama. In the GOP, 51% would enthusiastically back Giuliani, 38% McCain, 37% Thompson and 25% Romney.

Meanwhile, the survey found that winning the Nobel Peace Prize apparently doesn't bring a political bounce. While 48% of Democrats say they would like Nobel laureate Al Gore to run for president, that's 8 percentage points lower than in March. When his name is included in the horse race, the former vice president finishes third, behind Clinton and Obama.

By Susan Page, USA Today, October 16, 2007

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton has pulled ahead of rival Barack Obama at the bank as well as in the polls and both continue to crush Republicans in the money race.

Clinton holds nearly $35 million three months before the voting starts, to Obama's $32 million.

The Republican money leader, Rudy Giuliani, reported $11.6 million in the bank for the primaries.

Clinton, who had trailed Obama in fundraising and in money in the bank at the end of June, edged past him with an aggressive third quarter of fundraising.

The New York senator, who also has been raising money for the general election, had a total of $50.5 million in the bank, her campaign reported. But nearly $16 million of that cannot be used for the primaries.

She reported raising $23.7 million for the primary and had operating expenses of $21.3 million. Obama spent a nearly identical amount, but he raised $19.3 million in the quarter. They each reported debts -- Clinton owed $2.3 million and Obama owed $1.4 million.

Democrat John Edwards reported $12.4 million in the bank after raising nearly $7.2 million and spending almost $8.3 million during the quarter. New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, trying to establish himself among the Democratic leaders, reported $5.8 million in the bank. He raised $5.3 million in the quarter and spent $6.6 million.

Among Republicans, Mitt Romney spent $21 million during the third quarter, more than twice what he raised during the period and more than what he spent in previous quarters, according to his FEC report. John McCain, enjoying something of a resurgence in the polls after a dismal second quarter, reported more than $1.6 million cash on hand for the primaries and more than $1.7 million in debts, putting his campaign in the red. McCain has an extra $1.8 million in the bank that can only be used if he wins the Republican nomination.

McCain's financial condition may force him to accept public financing for his campaign, providing an infusion of cash but limiting how much he can spend. McCain's report detailed how his primary spending has been allocated by state, an indication that he is prepared to accept matching federal money.

Romney, a former Massachusetts governor and venture capitalist, has been tapping his personal wealth to supplement money from contributors. He raised $9.8 million and lent his campaign $8.5 million over the summer.

Giuliani reported spending $13 million during the same period, compared to the $10.2 million he raised for the primary campaign. Giuliani also raised about $1.3 million to spend on the general election if he wins the nomination.

Fred Thompson, who didn't officially enter the race until early September, reported spending $5.4 million during the quarter, more than half of it last month. Thompson, whose report covers fundraising and spending since June, when he began exploring a presidential bid, raised $12.8 million during that four month-period. He reported $7.1 million in the bank at the end of September, as well as $678,000 in debts.

Romney reported $9.2 million cash in hand, thanks in large part to the $17.5 million he has funneled into his campaign since the beginning of the year. He has raised $45 million since January, but leads all Republican candidates with $52.8 million in spending for the year.

In the Republican surprise of the quarter, long-shot candidate Ron Paul capitalized on his anti-war stance and Internet following to amass $5.2 million in contributions. He reported $5.4 million cash on hand at the end of September.

As a group Romney, Giuliani and Thompson enter the final stretch before the first nominating contests with money to spend on get-out-the-vote and advertising campaigns.

Giuliani led the Republican field in fundraising this summer, according to early estimates provided by the campaigns, though his July-September total fell from his high during April-June. It was the first time Giuliani's campaign spent more than it raised during a quarter.

Thompson, the former Tennessee senator and actor on NBC's "Law & Order," raised $9.3 million of his $12.8 million total during July-September.

Among Democrats, Clinton used the third quarter to secure her place as a national front-runner. She has recently hit 50-percent support among Democrats in national polls, though the race is closer in Iowa, where she holds a small lead in a cluster with Obama and Edwards.

Her biggest expenditure for the quarter was $4 million for salaries followed by $2.2 million for travel. Her advertising expenses, which are beginning to increase, were $1.7 million. Clinton also refunded $1.2 million to donors, including more than $800,000 to donors linked to disgraced Democratic fundraiser Norman Hsu.

Obama had a $3.8 million payroll for the quarter and spent $2.3 million on travel.

Giuliani is the Republican front-runner nationally, but he lags behind Romney in the leadoff caucus state of Iowa. In New Hampshire, another important early voting state, polls show the race a virtual toss-up among Giuliani, Romney and John McCain. Thompson also is competitive with the top tier in state and national polls. According to Giuliani's report, the campaign spent more than $2 million on payroll and $1.3 million on travel from July-September, about as much as it had during the first six months of the year. His campaign increased advertising this quarter, spending nearly $470,000 on radio and newspapers, including a full-page ad in The New York Times last month that criticized Clinton, the Democratic front-runner. Giuliani leads all candidates in radio advertising with more than 640 spots in several states, according to the Nielsen television ratings company.

Romney has spent much more on television, but radio is cheaper and can be targeted to specific audiences. Romney spent nearly $6 million on television and radio commercials, bringing his total ad spending for the year to a whopping $12.7 million. So far, Romney has placed the most political ads on the air than any candidate, Democrat or Republican. The Nielsen Co., which also monitors advertising, reported Monday that Romney had placed 10,600 television ads from January 1 to October 10. Richardson, the Democrat, was second with 5,800 television spots.

Both candidates, little known outside their states or national political circles, have used their ads to increase their name recognition, particularly in Iowa, the state scheduled to hold the first-in-the-nation caucuses in early January.

Obama ramped up his advertising toward the end of third quarter, spending nearly $3.3 million on media. He has placed more than 4,200 spots on television, practically all of them in Iowa, according to Nielsen. Clinton has placed nearly 2,200 spots, with more than 1,600 airing in Iowa. According to Nielsen, Clinton also has placed a small number of ads in other states, including New York, Tennessee, Louisiana and Arizona.

Associated Press, October 16, 2007

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Fred Thompson got into the Republican race with great expectations. And sure enough, just after he got in last month, polling showed Thompson and Rudy Giuliani were just about tied for front-runner. But since then, Thompson's taken a lot of flak for a lackluster campaign from party activists in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Support for his campaign has also wavered. The new CNN poll by the Opinion Research Corporation released Tuesday shows Thompson's support dropping -- now at 19 percent, down from 27 percent in September. He's now running second, slightly ahead of Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, who has 17 percent. Giuliani, the former mayor of New York, still leads with 27 percent.

Of the remaining Republican presidential candidates, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney received support from 13 percent of the Republicans polled, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee received 5 percent, Rep. Duncan Hunter of California received 3 percent, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas received 2 percent, Sen. Brownback of Kansas received 1 percent and Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado received 1 percent.

The poll's margin of error for the Republican race is plus or minus 5 percentage points.

On the Democratic side, Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York continues to gain support and build on her lead. She led Sen. Barack Obama by 23 points last month -- 46 percent to 23 percent. She now leads the Illinois senator by 30 points -- 51 percent to 21 percent.

Of the remaining Democratic presidential candidates former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards received support from 15 percent of the Democrats polled, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson received 4 percent, Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware received 1 percent, Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut received 1 percent, former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel received 1 percent and Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio received 1 percent. On this question, former Vice President Al Gore was not included as a candidate.

The margin of error for the Democratic poll was plus or minus 4.5 percent percentage points.

The poll, conducted by telephone on October 12-14, involved interviews with 1,212 adults, including 485 registered voters who describe themselves as Democrats or as Independents who lean Democratic, and 374 registered voters who describe themselves as Republicans or as Independents who lean Republican.

A majority of Democrats favor Clinton, whereas fewer than a third of Republicans favor their front-runner, Giuliani.

Now that Gore has won the Nobel Peace Prize, there doesn't appear to be a surge of support for him to make a run. Gore came in third among Democrats, at 14 percent -- about the same as last month -- when included in the poll as a potential candidate.

Expectations are building fast. Nearly two-thirds, or 64 percent, of those polled expect Clinton to be the Democratic nomination. That's four times more than those who expect Obama to be the nominee.

Of those polled, who do they expect to win the Republican nomination? Half chose Giuliani. That's nearly four to one over John McCain.

And who do voters expect to win the election? Clinton was chosen by 45 percent. Only 16 percent expect Giuliani to get elected. Nobody else gets more than 10 percent.

Now it's Clinton who faces great expectations. Here's one reason: Asked if they would vote for the Democratic candidate or the Republican candidate for president, voters prefer the Democrat by 13 points.

But when the two front-runners are pitted against each other, Clinton leads Giuliani by just two percentage points, 49 percent to 47 percent, a statistical tie.

The poll's margin of error for general election questions is plus or minus 3 percentage points.

Why would a Clinton-Giuliani matchup be so close? Mainly because Giuliani does eight points better than a generic Republican.

The race between Clinton and Giuliani is close, not because Clinton is weak, but because Giuliani gets a lot more support from moderate and independent voters than a generic Republican candidate. That's the irony, Giuliani is trying to sound more and more like a typical Republican to get the nomination. But voters don't see him as a typical Republican.

By Bill Schneider, CNN, October 16, 2007

MANCHESTER, N.H. - Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton on Tuesday proposed extending unpaid family leave to an additional 13 million workers and spending $1 billion a year on paid leave programs.

"Too many Americans today feel trapped between being there for their kids and being there for their employer, and our government policies have just not kept up with the realities of American life," said Clinton, who proposed expanding the Family Medical Leave Act to include companies that employ at least 25 workers instead of the current 50.

That would make millions more workers eligible for up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to care for a newborn or ill family member. Clinton also said she would encourage states to develop paid leave programs by offering $1 billion a year in grants.

"We have to get real about what's happening with families today," the New York senator said in a speech at the Manchesterr YWCA. "We want to make it easier for people to both work and fulfill their most important responsibilities."

Clinton described her own experience as a working mother, recalling that her law firm colleagues didn't know quite what to make of the firm's first pregnant lawyer. "I just kept getting more and more pregnant, and the lawyers kept walking down the hall looking the other way," she said. Clinton said she relished the time she took off after her daughter Chelsea was born, and that even though she was lucky to have help when she returned to work, she can empathize with the struggles many parents face.

"I've been fortunate to have so much support as a working mother, but I understand what it means to pulled in a million directions at once," she said, describing a hectic morning when both Chelsea and her baby sitter were sick and Clinton was due in court.

"It was just that gut-wrenching feeling," she said. "I was lucky enough to have a friend who came over and watched Chelsea while I ran to court and ran back home. But I know that happens every day, and there are so many pressures on young parents."

Beyond family leave, Clinton proposed requiring all workers to be given seven sick days a year that could be used to care for themselves or their children. Clinton's plan also would require employers to at least consider requests for flexible work schedules.

She also would increase funding for child care subsidies and allow them to be given to parents who stay at home with their children rather than only to those who send their children to daycare.

"Why should we pay for other people care for your children but not give you the support to stay home do it yourself?" she said.

At a town-hall forum later in Salem, the last question of the night provoked a passionate response from Clinton. A man who said he was sick of hearing the "same trash over and over" from politicians over the last 40 years challenged her to explain how she'd be any different.

"We Americans are very gullible," he said. "Tell me how honest and how sincere a person you are. When you become president, how much will you be able to do for the middle class and the American people?"

Clinton, her voice rising, said: "I disagree with you. I disagree. I think it makes a difference who the president is."

She acknowledged that there have been problems with presidents in the past, but argued that President Bush stands in a class apart. "President George W. Bushis an aberration," Clinton said. "He has broken faith with Republicans as well as Democrats ... They didn't sign up for this dangerous experiment in extremism."

By Holly Ramer, Associated Press, October 16, 2007

Three of the leading presidential contenders spent more than they raised for their bids over the last three months, according to fundraising disclosure reports released yesterday, as candidates continued to shatter records in the race for the White House.

Democratic Sen. Barack Obama spent $21.5 million, while among Republicans former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney spent $21 million between July and September -- more than twice the amount he raised -- and former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani spent $13 million.

Sen. Hillary Clinton spent more than $20 million, just less than she raised in the period, and finished with the most cash in reserve of any of the candidates for the frenetic run to the primaries.

While most candidates concentrated their spending in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, finance reports filed with the Federal Election Commission yesterday show Giuliani invested thousands of dollars opening campaign offices in places such as Fargo, North Dakota and Columbia, Missouri. Giuliani's decision to spend there, as well as in Florida, New Jersey and Illinois -- all states that will emerge after the initial burst of primaries and caucuses in early January -- signals that he alone among the Republicans is laying the groundwork for a national primary strategy, campaign strategists said. "It looks a lot like Rudy is banking on a breakout strategy, where he survives early losses and gets to the big states on January 29 and Super Tuesday," said Scott Reed, a former Bob Dole campaign strategist who is not attached to any presidential campaign this year. Giuliani raised $11 million during the third quarter of 2007 -- more than his Republican counterparts -- and reached $13 million in spending without making a significant purchase of television advertising.

Romney, meanwhile, spent almost a third of his $21 million outlay on television and radio ads that have been saturating the airwaves in Iowa and New Hampshire. His $9 million in cash on hand almost matches the $8.5 million he loaned his campaign, marking another quarter in which the candidate essentially loaned himself out of debt. When asked about their pace of spending, Romney campaign officials have pointed to the significant hurdles the former governor faced as a relative unknown in a field of high-profile GOP contenders. Romney had placed 10,893 television and radio ads through Oct. 10, according to the Neilsen Company. That total is higher than the combined ad buys of any two of the other candidates in either party. "The fact that Gov. Romney when we announced was at 4 percent and was practically unknown outside of Utah and Massachusetts was a significant challenge, especially given the fact that we were placed into a fundraising environment that had us competing against candidates who had universal name recognition among Republican donors," said Kevin Madden, a Romney spokesman.

The latest financial reports, which cover campaign activity between July 1 and Sept. 30 and were due to the Federal Election Commission yesterday, show Giuliani continues to be best positioned to spend money in the run-up to the crucial early contests, although Romney's willingness to self-fund his bid remains a wildcard.

While Giuliani has $16 million in the bank, Romney has $9.2 million on hand and former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson has $7.1 million. Sen. John McCain reported finishing September with $3.5 million in the bank, but when factoring in $1.7 million in debts owed and $1.8 million in funds he can only use if he reaches the general election, McCain finished the third quarter $94,000 in the red. Senator Sam Brownback (R-Kansas) just $95,000, as he spent heavily in an unsuccessful attempt to win the Iowa straw poll.

Those figures were dwarfed by the amounts being banked by the leading Democrats. Obama has more than $32 million on hand and another $4 million he can spend if he is the Democratic nominee. Clinton has $35 million in her account for the primary and $15 million she can only use in the general election. New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson (D), who has gained some traction in polls in Iowa and New Hampshire, reported more than $5 million cash on hand.

The quarterly financial reports offer an important look inside the gears of the campaigns as they move out of the quiet summer months and into one of the most active phases of the campaigns. Steve Elmendorf, a Democratic strategist who worked on Dick Gephardt's 2004 White House bid, said it is in the coming weeks that campaigns will start to dump money into television advertising and into organizational efforts that will in large measure determine the outcome of the early contests.

The reports also shed new light on the people who are donating money, and in some cases bundling checks, for the various campaigns.

This is the first FEC filing from Thompson's presidential campaign, for instance, and it shows among other things that Thompson has not yet become a major draw for the financial backers of President Bush. Only 19 of the 631 individuals previously identified as Pioneers or Rangers -- designations that George W. Bush's campaign gave to his top bundlers -- have joined the Thompson campaign. William H. Strong, vice chairman at Morgan Stanley, is one of those who signed on with Thompson after seeing little in the initial Republican field that excited him. "There were many positive attributes of the other candidates, but trying to reach a decision about who I thought could best serve this country as president, I felt it would be Fred," Strong said.

Looking at both fundraising and spending numbers, the Thompson campaign appeared to be a far less active enterprise than the Giuliani campaign. Thompson, for instance, spent just over $430,000 on travel, while the Giuliani campaign spent more than $1 million.

Giuliani's spending was elevated at least in part because he traveled in style. He often stayed in luxury hotels, spending $2,010 at the Greenbrier Hotel in West Virginia, $4,034 at La Costa Resort and Spa in Carlsbad, Calif., and $5,370 at the Fairmont Hotel in San Francisco. He also spent more than $565,000 reimbursing various corporate supporters for private jet travel, and another $800,000 on charter jet travel. "We have said, at the end of the day, looking at the total that we have, it shows we're running a very efficient and effective campaign and are very mindful of the donations that we receive," said Maria Comella, a Giuliani campaign spokeswoman.

One Giuliani bundler added yesterday he doesn't care how the former mayor is spending his money. "I don't give a damn whether he's staying at Motel 6 or Ritz Carlton," the bundler said. "What I care about is where he is in the polls."

By Matthew Mosk and Saran Cohen, The Washington Post, October 15, 2007

Buoyed by her strong lead among women in polls, Hillary Clinton's advisers are predicting that women will carry her to victory in the Democratic primary and that, if they do, they will turn out to vote for her in historic numbers in the general election next November.

The senator from New York is intensifying her focus on the female demographic with a series of women-focused events planned for this week, including an announcement in Manchester, N.H., tomorrow of a program to help working parents, an appearance today on the talk show "The View," and a fund-raiser and issues conference in Washington on Wednesday.

A memo to be made public today by Clinton's chief strategist, Mark Penn, contends that women will be the deciding force in the 2008 elections, and says the campaign's internal polling shows that 94 percent of women under 35 said they would be more likely to vote in the November election if the first woman nominee is on the ballot. Women represented 54 percent of the voters in 2004, but if Clinton is on the ticket, she can boost that majority by another point or two, Ann Lewis, a Clinton adviser who focuses on women's outreach, predicted yesterday.

On the campaign trail, Clinton often earns her biggest applause when she talks about how excited she would be to be the first woman president. Women who come out to see her cite her gender as a major source of their enthusiasm. In fact, women make up 65 percent of voters who attend Clinton's rallies, Penn writes. And they are a majority of her smaller donors.

Even some of Clinton's advisers were not expecting her gender to inspire such reactions.

"The intensity of it has surprised a lot of people," Penn said. "We are talking about electing someone from the group that is the majority of voters. That's more powerful than people realize."

Clinton's current lead in the polls, both in the Democratic primary and in a hypothetical general election contest, is thanks in large part to women. A recent Washington Post-ABC News poll showed Clinton leading in the Democratic primary with 57 percent of female voters compared with 15 percent for Senator Barack Obama, and 13 percent for John Edwards.

Penn pointed out that the Post-ABC poll shows Clinton beating former Mayor Rudy Giuliani of New York by 8 points overall, and by 18 points among women.

By Marcella Bombardieri, The Boston Globe, October 15, 2007

Surveys conducted last week identified three notable swings in the race for the Democratic Presidential nomination.

First, in both the daily Presidential Tracking Poll and the weekly Rasmussen Reports numbers, Sunday morning and she is at 46% for the full week ending October 14. That's up four points from the week before and two points higher than her previous peak reached in the first week of August.

Second, core opposition for all Presidential candidates has grown since summer. For much of the year, Clinton was the only candidate with core opposition approaching the 50% mark but now the rest of the field has caught up. Five of the seven leading candidates (four Republican, three Democrat) now have more than 40% of all voters committed to voting against them. The other two (McCain and Thompson) face core opposition of 39%. In addition to its impact on Election 2008, a commentary by Douglas Schoen says that the "cynicism of the American people is only hardening and deepening."

Third, and finally, as voters tune it they are detecting more differences between the candidates. For most of the year, Democratic voters saw little ideological difference between the leading Presidential hopefuls in their own party. Now, however, 40% of Democrats see Barack Obama as politically liberal while just 29% see Hillary Clinton in that way.

In addition to these trends and their potential impact on the Democratic nomination process, data released last week showed that Clinton has opened a growing lead over Republican frontrunners Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson. Her lead has grown for several consecutive surveys. Interestingly, the data shows Clinton's toughest general election candidate at the moment is Arizona Senator John McCain, a man who is barely hanging on to top-tier status in the race for the Republican nomination.

A week ago, Rasmussen Reports noted that Barack Obama's weekly numbers had improved and that it might be the beginning of a turnaround. This week, however, his support is back to 23%, matching his average for September.

John Edward's support this week has fallen to 11%, the lowest level recorded since mid-June.

For the seven days ending October 14, 2007, Hillary Clinton earns 46% of the vote. Barack Obama is second at 23% followed by John Edwards at 11%. Bill Richardson attracts 4% while Dennis Kucinich at 3% and Joe Biden at 2%. Chris Dodd and Mike Gravel's support each rounds up to 1% while 8% of Likely Democratic Primary Voters are undecided.

The seven day results typically include interviews with more than 1,000 Likely Democratic Primary Voters. This includes both Democrats and those independents likely to vote in a Democratic Primary. In some state primaries, independent voters are allowed to participate in party primaries while in others they are excluded. The margin of sampling error for the weekly update is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

Updates prior to July 16 were based upon four days of polling conducted the Monday through Thursday preceding release.

Rasmussen Reports, October 15, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Many adults in the Keystone State would support Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton in the 2008 United States presidential election, according to a poll by the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. At least 48 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in head-to-head contests against four prospective Republican rivals.

Rodham Clinton holds a six-point edge over former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, a seven-point lead over Arizona senator John McCain, an 11-point advantage over actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson, and a 12-point lead over former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.

In other contests, Illinois senator Barack Obama trails Giuliani by two points, but leads McCain, Thompson and Romney. Former North Carolina senator John Edwards is almost tied with Giuliani, but ahead of the three other GOP contenders.

In 2004, Democratic nominee John Kerry carried Pennsylvania's 21 electoral votes, with 51 per cent of the vote. No Republican has won the Keystone State since George H. Bush in 1988.

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, October 15, 2007

Barack Obama finally took aim at his Democratic presidential campaign rival Hillary Rodham Clinton, but his attack against her Senate vote defining the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist group looks more like a misfire than a direct hit.

That's because he was absent for the vote that he deemed so important, instead saying he would have voted the other way had he been there. And yet in Iowa on Friday the Illinois senator focused on last month's non-binding resolution known as the Kyle-Lieberman Amendment for his most specific and pointed attack against Clinton so far in the Democratic race.

Obama said the New York senator's vote for the amendment proves that there is "a real difference" between them. Sure, Clinton was the only Senate Democrat running for president who backed the amendment, making it a worthy debate among party hopefuls. But not bothering to cast a vote of his own takes the some of the punch out of Obama's attack.

By Craig Crawford, CQ Politics, October 15, 2007

AMES, Iowa -- The candidate was running late. But at the crossroads of Main Street and Kellogg Avenue here after dusk one night recently, a girl power rally was underway, even before Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton pulled up to the event site. Raining Jane, an all-female band, played a Joan Jett cover. White-haired women packed onto a riser. Ruth Harkin, wife of Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin, took the microphone and roused the audience, saying the "first woman president of the United States" was on her way.

When Clinton finally appeared -- introduced by a seventh-grade girl who precociously described the gender gap in American presidential politics -- the New York senator launched into her standard stump speech, wrapping up with what has become a familiar discourse about the demographics of the campaign trail. Clinton said she is "often struck at two groups of people" who come to shake her hand -- women in their 90s who want to make history and parents of young daughters.

"As I go by, shaking hands and meeting people," Clinton said, building up to the apex of her speech, "I often hear a dad or a mom lean over to a little girl, and say, 'See, honey, you can be anything you want to be.' In the early days of the 2008 presidential race, the question was often asked: Is the country ready to elect a female president? And Clinton seemed to be bracing to confront the doubters.

But as the primary campaign has evolved, giving Clinton a substantial lead in national polls in the race for the Democratic nomination, her public approach to the gender issue has shifted with it. Far from running away from the so-called woman question, she has taken to openly embracing it. The result is a campaign that is much more overtly feminist than her own advisers had anticipated -- more House Speaker Nancy Pelosi than former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher, more focused on reaching out to women than neutralizing worries about a woman candidate.

This week, Clinton is holding a series of events designed to underscore her strength among women. After a speech in New York on Monday, Clinton will unveil in New Hampshire on Tuesday a domestic policy initiative that aides say has implications for women, followed by a women's fundraiser on Wednesday.

In the latest Washington Post-ABC News survey, conducted in late September, 57 percent of women said they would support Clinton in a Democratic primary, compared with 15 percent for Sen. Barack Obama and 13 percent for former senator John Edwards. Of those who support Clinton, 31 percent said that her chance to make history was a factor in their decision.

At the same time, in a theoretical general election test against Republican front-runner Rudolph W. Giuliani, Clinton has a lead that is almost entirely attributable to women. She also has a gaping lead among self-described feminists, according to the same poll. Men and women who call themselves feminists preferred Clinton 64 to 30 percent, while those who did not were evenly divided between Clinton and Giuliani, 48 to 46 percent.

The flip side of her strong support from women is the potential for a backlash among men -- especially in a state such as Iowa, the first caucus state, which has never elected a woman to Congress. Mark Penn, her chief strategist, said the "level of emotional attachment" between female voters and Clinton is strong enough to help carry her through the Iowa caucuses, which he said he expected to be 55 to 60 percent women. Fifty-four percent of Democratic caucusgoers in 2004 were women. "It may be true that statewide they haven't elected a woman, but that's very different from a Democratic primary or caucus," Penn said. He also pointed out that Clinton is faring better among men in recent surveys than she did earlier this year.

Asked in a recent interview whether she worries about a gender gap, Clinton replied: "Well, but it depends on how you look at all the various research that's been done. "But I think there's a lot of room for growth, and I intend to do as much as I can to grow that," she said, smiling.

As Clinton spoke two days later at GT Solar Inc., a renewable energy firm in Merrimack, N.H., several male audience members shook their heads and refused to clap. "I didn't see anything alarming," said Jaime Navarro, a financial planning officer, after hearing Clinton speak. But he said he would not support her. "I just think a lot of the agenda she's putting out is very socialistic."

At the next Clinton stop, a town hall meeting in Derry, N.H., Leslie Harrison, 52, said the fact that Clinton is a woman is important as she considers how to vote in the New Hampshire primary. "Men have been making a mess of things for a long time," she said. "A woman would be more sensitive to sending our children off to war."

From the outset of the race, Penn and other Clinton advisers contended that she would gain a potentially decisive advantage from women voters. But her campaign had also forecast an emphasis on national security strength that, while present, has not dominated her candidacy.

In the interview on her campaign bus in Cedar Rapids the other week, Clinton played down the notion that she is favoring one demographic over another. "Well, I think I'm appealing to men, too," she said when asked whether she is appealing explicitly to women.

Pressed again about her effort to reach women specifically, Clinton said: "Well, I am," adding, "because what I experienced on the campaign trail starting in last January or February when I got out there was how strongly how many women and girls feel about this. There was this great outpouring of interest in the campaign and a desire to get involved." She continued: "I guess I've been doing this long enough [that I can remember] when no campaign would have really done that except as an afterthought . . . it's exciting to see the role that women are playing in this campaign."

During several days of campaigning in Iowa this month, Clinton spoke to women, as a woman, as overtly as she ever has on the stump. When she discussed retirement savings, she put it in context for women, who dip in and out of the workforce more often than men and who rely more heavily on Social Security. She met a server at a Maid-Rite diner -- a single mother who raised two sons working two or three jobs at once -- and instantly the woman's story became a staple of Clinton's stump speech. At one point, she said she had been campaigning for president so long she could have had a baby.

At the Ames rally, Clinton described at length the types of voters who have touched her most on the trail.

Of the women in their 90s who approached her, she said: "When this started happening, I was so touched by it. As I meet them, I remember the woman who said to me, 'I'm 95 years old' as I was shaking her hand. She said, 'I was born before women could vote, but I'm going to live long enough to see a woman in the White House.' " The audience erupted in cheers.

By Anne Kornblut, The Washington Post, October 14, 2007

Hillary Clinton's lead in the race for the White House is now so formidable that, even with his Nobel Peace Prize, Al Gore considers her unbeatable, according to his former campaign aides.

The former vice-president, whose supporters have formed a shadow campaign team in case he decides to run, has told friends he is reluctant to take on her formidable political organisation by throwing his hat into the ring.

One strong backer of the beaten candidate in 2000 told The Sunday Telegraph that the Nobel Prize had "increased his artillery" should he decide to risk making a second bid for the White House, but added that this was now likely only if Mrs Clinton made an unexpected slip.

For the former first lady, Mr Gore's reluctance to parlay his Nobel victory into his own attempt to reach the White House is further evidence of her remarkable political renaissance.

Currently Mrs Clinton is well ahead in the battle for the Democratic nomination and, unlike Mr Gore, she has been busy campaigning in crucial states such as New Hampshire.

To reporters watching her trying to reach out to voters in that key primary state – at one point she paused in the mud to speak to a man in a wheelchair and a young family – Mrs Clinton appears a diminutive, school-marmish figure in her dark blue trouser suit.

But, almost seven years since her husband left the White House, she has gone from cuckolded wife whose brief foray into healthcare policy was a humiliating disaster to a two-term senator who claims to be the most experienced candidate in the race.

Polls show her leading her main Democratic rival, Barack Obama, by up to 33 points and seeing off each of the leading Republicans in a general election.

Even the professional Hillary-haters on the Right are finding that times are lean. The American Conservative magazine last week chronicled how websites and lobbying groups that once needed only utter her name to open Republican wallets are now struggling to raise campaign cash.

But despite having the name, the money and the organisation, questions remain. During a run through New Hampshire last week, Mrs Clinton and her team appeared paralysed by caution. She made a speech to 800 students and other voters in Plymouth, followed by a "barn party" in rural Canterbury, complete with bluegrass music, where she took questions from voters but not from the press. She cannot hide from her husband's legacy, and nor does she try. Aides hand out bumper stickers that read "Bill 4 1st Man" - though the former president himself prefers the more rakish "first laddie" - and she peppers her speech with references to "my husband".

With a speaking style that is more pedagogue than demagogue, Mrs Clinton condemns inherited wealth for "undermining the meritocracy" and pledges to "get rid of all this cronyism" in Washington, apparently oblivious to the question raised by her own candidacy.

If she wins, America will by 2012 have had a Bush or a Clinton as president or vice-president for 32 years - the kind of dynastic power not seen in Britain for 200 years.

Supporters accuse Republicans who raise this of hypocrisy. Grace D'Arcy, 18, said: "Two Bushes were no big deal to them, but with the Clintons it's: 'Oh my God, it's inherited.' With the Clintons it's not passing the presidency to a child. They got married because they have the same interests."

But it is Mrs Clinton's differences from her husband that may cost her. She patently lacks his charisma, despite her efforts to emote: telling her audience that after hearing a student's hard luck story, "I got tears in my eyes", or declaring apple orchards "very close to my heart".

Most supporters cite her command of detail and her competence, with no mention of the passion that inspires Obama supporters.

Martin Kimbell, 48, who runs a small business selling canvas covers for boats, said: "She speaks fast, coherently, articulately and to the point. She's very intelligent. Because of all the controversy she has got the name recognition and she has persevered."

Even her political rivals respect her abilities. A Republican strategist who worked in the Reagan White House said: "Whenever you go up against the Clintons, they have all the angles covered. They're very professional."

And they know how to bend with the prevailing wind. Even Mrs Clinton's retreat from her husband's support for free trade - apparently to appease the Democrats' Left - has its advantages.

Conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer wrote on Friday: "There lies the beauty, not just of Clinton on free trade but of the Clinton candidacy itself: she has no principles. Her liberalism is redeemed by her ambition; her ideology is subordinate to her political needs." But the strength of her position has induced almost pathological caution, refusing even in informal settings to talk to reporters who are not approved by her handlers.

The other danger for Mrs Clinton is that her poll lead may merely reflect name recognition. Many voters, even in election-savvy New Hampshire, are only just tuning in to the election - such as the man at the Plymouth event who was still unaware of the fact that Mr Obama is black, a subject that has preoccupied the media for months. Members of the bluegrass band at the barn - renamed The Clintones for the day - agreed they were not ready to pick a candidate. Mary Dellea, 28, said: "I won't decide for about a year. I like her but she's not inevitable."

In a reference to the guttural outburst that finished Howard Dean, the Democrat frontrunner before the last election, she added: "All it takes is one little scream." And with Donna Brazille, a former Gore campaign manager, predicting that her man will choose to "play kingmaker", he could be the making or breaking of the Clinton campaign whether he runs or not.

By Tim Shipman, The Telegraph, October 14, 2007

THE RACE: The presidential race for Republicans, Democrats in Nevada

THE NUMBERS - DEMOCRATS

Hillary Rodham Clinton, 39 percent.

Barack Obama, 21 percent.

John Edwards, 9 percent.

Bill Richardson, 8 percent

THE NUMBERS - REPUBLICANS

Rudy Giuliani, 28 percent.

Fred Thompson, 23 percent.

Mitt Romney, 17 percent.

John McCain, 9 percent.

The survey of 300 Republican and 300 Democratic voters was conducted Oct. 9-11 by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research Inc. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 6 percentage points.



Associated Press, October 14, 2007

SEIU's decision shows skepticism about candidate

John Edwards spent four years positioning himself to be labor's candidate, walking picket lines, helping workers organize, and folding duvets with hotel maids.

But his efforts did not secure the coveted backing of the 1.9-million-member Service Employees International Union, one of the country's largest labor federations, which decided last week not to make a national endorsement for the Democratic primaries.

The decision reflects skepticism about Edwards's ability to capture the nomination, as well as the influence of large SEIU memberships in Illinois and New York, which back their home-state candidates, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, respectively. The SEIU's move also shows the aggressive efforts by all the candidates to court labor and address their key issues.

"If you're not sure you have a winner, and you're going to tick off your own folks, then you have to stop and pause and ask whether it's worth it," said Joshua Freeman, a labor historian at the City University of New York.

Political analysts say Edwards had been counting on the SEIU endorsement to provide momentum and boost his credibility. Despite their declining membership, the ability of unions to organize workers, set up phone banks, and reach voters remain important assets. According to several labor leaders, SEIU was prepared to spend as much as $10 million for the primary, a sum that would have helped fill the void for Edwards, who has limited spending now that he has agreed to accept public financing, and trails Clinton in campaign cash as badly as he lags behind her in the polls.

The former North Carolina senator has wasted little time reacting to the setback. Just days after the SEIU said its state affiliates for the first time could begin making separate endorsements starting tomorrow, Edwards announced plans to triple his campaign staff in Nevada, a state with an early primary where labor is powerful. Yesterday, he met privately with SEIU leaders in New Hampshire. Tomorrow, he is expected to pick up SEIU backing in Iowa and other states.

"This is harder for the campaigns and a lot more work. The support is diffuse," said Gary Smith, president of the State Employees' Association of New Hampshire, SEIU Local 1984. "But now there is a lot more of a focus by candidates at the state level and our members love the attention."

The piecemeal endorsements will allow other candidates to swoop in and gain support in their areas of strength.

"The endorsement was always a dogfight. From our perspective, the strategy of other campaigns to stop any endorsement failed outright," said Chris Kofinis, a spokesman for the Edwards campaign. "They were concerned the grass-roots support was for Edwards."

SEIU secretary-treasurer Anna Burger said in an interview that having candidates from states with large union membership, including New York and Illinois, made it difficult to reach the high threshold required for the union backing. Unlike last year's endorsement, which required a majority of the executive board, candidates needed backing from a majority of the board representing 60 percent of the members.

For Edwards, the absence of a national SEIU endorsement will likely have ripple effects on the decisions of other unions, according to political observers. Months ago, leaders of Change to Win, a coalition of seven unions totaling 6 million members, including SEIU and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, thought they could make a unanimous endorsement for the primary. In August, Edwards had already clinched one of the coalition's unions, the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, with 500,000 members. But the SEIU decision makes a single endorsement by the coalition unlikely, said Change to Win spokesman Chris Ortman.

So far, Edwards has backing from unions representing more than 2 million members, but he is well behind Clinton, who has won support from national and regional unions totaling almost 4 million members.

Gerald W. McEntee, president of the 1.4 million-member American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, said many unions have implemented a more rigorous endorsement process following the 2004 campaign, when labor moved early to back former Vermont governor Howard Dean, only to see him drop out early in the nomination race.

AFSCME, which spent more than $5 million during the primary season to support Bill Clinton during the 1992 campaign, hopes to have an endorsement by early November. McEntee said Edwards has fought and solicited strength within the labor movement, but concerns remain about his place in the polls and heavy reliance on winning in Iowa to gain momentum nationally.

"What we're looking for in the last analysis, when the candidates are so close in terms of policy positions, is who is electable," he said.

By Jenn Abelson, The Boston Globe, October 14, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Hillary Rodham Clinton remains the frontrunner in the national race for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination in the United States, according to a poll by Gallup released by USA Today. 47 per cent of respondents would support the New York senator in a 2008 primary.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 26 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 11 per cent. Support is lower for New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, Delaware senator Joe Biden, Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich, and Connecticut senator Chris Dodd.

On Oct. 10, Kucinich urged fellow Democrats in Congress to end the Iraq war, declaring, "You don't need another (congressional) vote (or) another bill to end this war. There is money available today to bring the troops home. There are men and women dying right now. (...) This was a war based on lies."

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, October 14, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton is holding on to the lead in the Sunshine State, according to a poll by the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. At least 46 per cent of respondents in Florida would back the New York senator in head-to-head contests against four prospective Republican candidates.

Hillary Clinton holds a three-point edge over former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, a four-point lead over Arizona senator John McCain, a nine-point advantage over actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson, and an 11-point lead over former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.

In other contests, Illinois senator Barack Obama trails Giuliani and McCain, but leads Thompson and Romney. Former North Carolina senator John Edwards is two points behind Giuliani, but ahead of McCain, Thompson and Romney.

In 2004, Republican George W. Bush carried Florida's 27 electoral votes, with 52 per cent of all cast ballots. In 2000, weeks of recounts and court injunctions concluded in a 537-vote victory for Bush over Democrat Al Gore. Since 1972, the only Democrats to win the Sunshine State in a presidential election are Jimmy Carter in 1976 and Bill Clinton in 1996.

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, October 14, 2007

LORIS, S.C. - In the beauty parlors that are among the social hubs for black women in the Carolinas, loyalties are being tested as voters here contemplate the first Democratic primary in the South.

Clara Vereen, who has been working here in rural eastern South Carolina as a hairstylist for more than 40 of her 61 years, reflects the ambivalence of many black women as she considers both Senator Barack Obama of Illinois and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

"I've got enough black in me to want somebody black to be our president," she said in her tiny beauty shop, an extension of her home, after a visit from an Obama organizer. "I would love that, but I want to be real, too." Part of being real, said Ms. Vereen, whom everyone calls Miss Clara, is worrying that a black president would not be safe. "I fear that they just would kill him, that he wouldn't even have a chance," she said as she styled a customer's hair with a curling iron. One way to protect him, she suggested, would be not to vote for him.

And Mrs. Clinton?

"We always love Hillary because we love her husband," Ms. Vereen said. Then she paused. Much of the chitchat in her shop is about whether a woman could or should be president. "A man is supposed to be the head," she said. "I feel like the Lord has put man first, and I believe in the Bible."

Black women are a crucial constituency in South Carolina, which may hold its voting as early as Jan. 19. In 2004, about half of the state's Democratic primary voters were black (in Iowa and New Hampshire, black voters made up about 1 percent or less of Democrats). And 29 percent of all Democratic primary voters here were black women, according to exit polls, giving them a pivotal role. "It's a key voting segment," said Carey Crantford, a Democratic pollster based in Columbia. "They hold the balance of power, all other things being equal."

Most polls here show Mrs. Clinton leading and Mr. Obama second, while John Edwards, who won the state's primary in 2004, has been a distant third. Pollsters caution that polling in a contest like this can be unreliable because whites might not be telling the truth when they say they will vote for a black man, and blacks might not be telling the truth when they say they are undecided.

Still, Mr. Obama appears to have a big lead over Mrs. Clinton among black men, said Adolphus G. Belk Jr., a political scientist at Winthrop University who co-directed a recent study of black voters. Black women, Dr. Belk said, are divided equally between Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton, and significantly, perhaps a third are undecided. "They stand at the intersection of race, class and gender," he said. "Black men say to them, 'Sister, are you with us?' and at the same time white women say, 'Sister, are you with us?'"

In interviews with more than three dozen black women both here and in Columbia, the state capital, most said they were still puzzling over which way to go. Some said that specific issues like health care and education were important to them, but most thought their votes would be based on intangibles and determined in the end by prayer.

Vanessa Gerald, 38, a stylist at Carrie's Magic Touch, a salon around the corner from Miss Clara's, said she was torn because Mr. Obama was "trying to help his people, which Hillary is too." Ms. Gerald said she would "have to go with my faith" in making her final decision but was thrilled to have such a choice. "This is history here," she said, puckering up a client's hair. "On both sides. Either way, it's history. So let's see what history going to bring in."

In trying to reach these voters, the Obama campaign has organized a network around beauty salons, a central gathering spot for black women, particularly in rural areas like this one. Ashley Baia, 23, the Obama organizer here in Horry County, is like a modern-day circuit rider, traveling from salon to salon on Thursdays, Fridays and Saturdays, the busiest days for getting a hairdo. Ms. Baia makes repeated visits, hoping to develop relationships with the owners and customers and giving spiels in which she notes that after law school, Mr. Obama skipped going to a big firm and went to work instead on the South Side of Chicago as a community organizer.

Betty McClain, 51, a bus driver who was waiting to have her hair done at Miss Clara's, said after Ms. Baia left that she liked what she heard about Mr. Obama. But she likes Mrs. Clinton, too. "She's already been president before," Ms. McClain said approvingly, dismissing Bill Clinton's role in his own administration. "He was just there," Ms. McClain said of Mr. Clinton. "He was just the husband, that's all. She really ran the country."

This shows what the Obama campaign is up against. Voters tend to know more about the Clintons than they do about Mr. Obama.

Another striking theme that emerged in the interviews was how often these women described an almost maternal concern for Mr. Obama's safety, which they take seriously by noting that he was given Secret Service protection in May, earlier than any presidential candidate ever except Mrs. Clinton, who already had protection as a former first lady. The assertion this year by Mr. Obama's wife, Michelle, that as a black man he could be shot "going to the gas station" has done little to quell their fear. This was a topic in Carrie's Magic Touch. One customer, Maria Hewett, 63, a retired factory worker, told the others she would probably vote for Mr. Obama despite her fear that he could be a target. "Things happened with presidents in the past, and they weren't African-Americans," Ms. Hewett said, sitting in one of two big barber chairs, her hair in curlers. "President Kennedy was a good person, and somebody took him down," she said, prompting a chorus of "that's true, that's true."

Still, she added, "Hillary's husband has a lot of wisdom and knowledge, and that will help her." This elicited another round of "that's right, that's true."

"Whoever it is," she concluded, "we just ask the Lord to bless them and take care of them."

Gilda Cobb-Hunter, a Democratic state representative from Orangeburg, S.C., who has not endorsed anyone in the primary, said she had heard black women say they were afraid for Mr. Obama. "This really troubled me," Ms. Cobb-Hunter said. "Maybe it's a Southern thing. They want to protect him from the bad people, and in order to protect him, they won't support him. They want to see him around, making a difference." She was virtually the only black woman interviewed who brought up Mr. Edwards, who was born in South Carolina. "He can be elected because this is still America, and white men still rule," Ms. Cobb-Hunter said. She is under pressure from both the Edwards and Obama campaigns for an endorsement.

Mr. Obama's campaign is focused on his message of hope and, increasingly, religious faith. Mr. Edwards spotlights poverty and rural areas. Mrs. Clinton's campaign is emphasizing her experience and highlighting her commitment to after-school programs, teacher-retention programs and health insurance for children. The campaign, which has an extensive list of endorsements from local officials, is organizing supporters thematically, like "Health Care Workers for Hillary" and, of course, "Women for Hillary." Mrs. Clinton's first commercial, a radio spot, is aimed squarely at black women.

The battle for their votes is heating up. Mr. Obama visited the state on Oct. 6 and 7, Mr. Edwards visited on Oct. 11 and Mrs. Clinton came on Oct. 12 and 13, toting the prized endorsement of Representative John Lewis, the Georgia Democrat and a major figure of the civil rights movement. As the race intensifies, Mr. Obama is expected to showcase one of his chief supporters, Oprah Winfrey, and Mrs. Clinton to showcase former President Bill Clinton, who remains enormously popular with black voters. Both campaigns here are headed by black women.

For many women, Mr. Obama's safety and Mrs. Clinton's husband were only part of the equation. They said they were also trying to calculate whether a black man or a white woman had a better chance of being elected. Which would encounter more resistance from the white male power structure? Would a black man stir up racial tensions that would boomerang and set African-Americans back?

"I think it will be difficult for either one of them to hold that position because there are still so many inequalities that exist, especially here in the South," said Angel Clark, 42, a health career counselor who had just finished a walk in Columbia, S.C., with thousands of others, mostly women, to raise awareness of breast cancer. She is still undecided.

Depending on how Mr. Obama does in the earlier states, South Carolina, with its huge black population, could become do-or-die for him. Some of his supporters say that S.C. stands for "Stop Clinton." Campaign aides said that many here would be looking to Iowa to see the degree to which white voters will vote for a black man.

Tonya Thomas, 46, and Tina Thompson, 45, both involved in early childhood education, discussed their internal struggle over whom to support as they talked with a reporter after the breast cancer walk. Ms. Thomas said she liked Mrs. Clinton but was not "totally sure." "Men have been running the country for a while, and I'd like to see a woman in office," she said. "Personally, I don't feel the country is ready for an African-American," she said, adding matter-of-factly, "He would be killed."

Ms. Thompson said she was leaning toward Mr. Obama. "I don't think they'd let a woman run the country," she said. But, Ms. Thomas pointed out, "She does have Bill," whereupon she and her friend burst into laughter. "I hate to bring him up," Ms. Thomas said sheepishly, "but I do like Bill, and it's a way to get him back."

Ms. Thompson considered this. "Yes, he would be there for her," she said. Asked if she was now leaning toward Mrs. Clinton, she said she might be. But, she added, "You never know."

By Katharine Q. Seelye, The New York Times, October 14, 2007

Hillary Rodham Clinton is holding a commanding lead over Barack Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination in New Hampshire, a poll released Sunday found.

Clinton had the support of 40 percent of those surveyed compared to 20 percent for Obama, Marist College Institute for Public Opinion said.

John Edwards was third (12 percent) and Bill Richardson fourth (7 percent).

On the Republican side, Mitt Romney held a slight edge over Rudy Giuliani (25 percent to 21 percent). John McCain was third (18 percent) and Fred Thompson fourth (10 percent).

Clinton was the overwhelming choice among those polled who want a strong leader or someone who will bring about change - 44 percent chose her compared with 20 percent for Obama and 11 percent for Edwards.

Clinton also drew the most support - 33 percent - from those questioned who ranked the Iraq war as their top issue. And the New York senator was seen as the most likely Democrat to win in November, getting the nod from 58 percent in the survey.

On the GOP side, when people were asked to pick a strong leader, Romney got 29 percent, compared with 23 percent for McCain and 22 percent for Giuliani. Security against terrorism was the most important issue for GOP voters; on this issue, Romney was picked by 29 percent, and Giuliani and McCain by 21 percent each. Giuliani, the former New York mayor, was picked by more people in the survey as having the best chance of winning in November - 36 percent versus 30 percent for Romney.

The poll was conducted from Oct. 4-9 and involved telephone interviews with 1,512 registered voters and New Hampshire residents likely to register in time to vote in the presidential primary. The poll has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4 percentage points for Democratic primary voters and 4.5 percentage points for Republican primary voters.




Associated Press, October 14, 2007

A new poll shows former Vice President Al Gore's entry into the Democratic presidential race might not have such a large impact on Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) after all. In fact, it might help to further solidify her frontrunner status.

The InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion poll, which was conducted nationwide Friday evening after Gore was named a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize for his work on climate change, shows Gore taking heavily from undecided voters and the other candidates - not Clinton.

Clinton registers 43 percent in the Gore-inclusive poll, which is a similar number to her take in polls without Gore. And her 20-30 point lead holds steady, as Gore takes second place with 15 percent, while Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) and former Sen. John Edwards (N.C.) take 13 percent and 10 percent, respectively.

Gore has not ruled out a presidential bid but has not provided a strong indication that he will run either.

"The bottom line is that a Gore candidacy, at this stage, seems unlikely given the fact that the best thing that can happen to Hillary Clinton is another man, even one with a Nobel Prize, getting into the race and dividing up the anti-Clinton vote rather than taking votes away from her," InsiderAdvantage CEO Matt Towery said in the Southern Political Report.

Towery noted that Gore largely took from the other male candidates when he was included in much of the early polling on the race as well, and that the Nobel Prize has not changed that.

By Aaron Blake, The Hill, October 13, 2007

Rep. John Lewis, the veteran civil rights activist and one of the most prominent African-American members of Congress, is endorsing Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Democratic presidential primary, her campaign announced on Friday.

"I have looked at all the candidates, and I believe that Hillary Clinton is the best prepared to lead this country at a time when we are in desperate need of strong leadership," Lewis (D-Ga.) said in a statement. He was preparing to make an official announcement around noon in Atlanta.

Lewis, who was chairman of the activist group Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee during the early 1960s, is best known for his role leading protestors across the Edmund Pettus bridge in Selma, Alabama in March of 1965.

Beaten by police during the nonviolent march, Lewis went on to become an icon of so-called "Bloody Sunday." When Lewis led a pilgrimage back to the site earlier this year, Sen. Barack Obama attended and spoke at his annual church service. Not to be outdone, Clinton and her husband - who has close ties with Lewis -- scheduled an appearance in Selma to match. All of them marched across the bridge together in something of a media circus.

In her comments welcoming the Lewis endorsement, Clinton called him a "great American hero." Her campaign hopes the move will help solidify the impression that she is rolling steadily toward the nomination, picking up even members of the African-American community in her fight to defeat Obama.

Bill Burton, Obama spokesman says, "Barack Obama has great admiration for John Lewis and understands his long relationship with Bill Clinton. He looks forward to his support when Barack Obama is the nominee."

By Anne E. Kornblut, The Washington Post, October 12, 2007

Clinton and John Lewis, a leading rights leader in the 1960s, were scheduled to hold a campaign event Friday in Atlanta to discuss the endorsement.

"I have looked at all the candidates, and I believe that Hillary Clinton is the best prepared to lead this country at a time when we are in desperate need of strong leadership. She will restore a greater sense of community in America, and reclaim our standing in the world," Lewis said in a statement released by the Clinton campaign.

The endorsement is a setback to Obama, who has counted on support from black leaders to spark his candidacy.

"Barack Obama has great admiration for John Lewis and understands his long relationship with Bill Clinton. He looks forward to his support when Barack Obama is the nominee," said Obama spokesman, Bill Burton in response to the endorsement.

The son of sharecroppers, Lewis, 67, rose to fame as one of the "Freedom Riders" promoting civil rights in the South. He was badly beaten by police during a non-violent civil rights march from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, in 1961, and still bears scars from the experience.

Lewis also served as director of the Student Non-violent Coordinating Committee, one of the major civil rights organizations of the era. He was elected to Congress in 1986.

Associated Press, October 13, 2007

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's effort to deepen black support for her presidential candidacy received a boost today as she won the endorsement of Representative John Lewis of Georgia, a legend of the civil rights movement.

Mr. Lewis, a key organizer in the civil rights vanguard during the 1960s, and a leader of the "Bloody Sunday" march in Selma across the Pettus Bridge in 1965, was scheduled to endorse Mrs. Clinton at an event in Atlanta this afternoon.

Clinton advisers cast the endorsement as a political coup over Senator Barack Obama, whose own campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination has inspired and won support from African-American leaders and political activists.

Mr. Obama had built his own relationship with Mr. Lewis and savored his possible endorsement, according to associates of both men. At the same time, Mr. Obama was aware of Mr. Lewis's strong ties to former President Bill Clinton: Mr. Lewis was an early supporter of Mr. Clinton during his 1992 race for president, and they have remained close over the years. Mr. Lewis and Mrs. Clinton developed their own friendship over time too.

Both Mr. Clinton and Mrs. Clinton courted Mr. Lewis this year to earn his endorsement, according to advisers to Mrs. Clinton. Just before the Selma anniversary, Mr. Lewis told The New York Times last winter that he was inclined to endorse Mr. Obama until he received a phone call from former President Clinton. Whatever the two men discussed helped persuade Mr. Lewis to remain neutral and take more time evaluating the candidates.

"One day I lean one way, the next day I lean another way," Mr. Lewis said in the interview. "Sometimes, you have to have what I call an executive session with yourself, a come-to-Jesus meeting, and somehow, some way we will all have to make a decision."

The Clintons' joint appearance in Selma in March for the anniversary of "Bloody Sunday" - an event that Mr. Obama also attended - was a moment that touched Mr. Lewis personally, Clinton advisers said. Mrs. Clinton kept up the dialogue through the year, and advisers say that Mr. Lewis was impressed with her proposals for pre-kindergarten education, health care, and the economy, and he trusted that she would share his views on civil rights.

Asked about the Lewis endorsement, Obama spokesman Bill Burton said: "Barack Obama has great admiration for John Lewis and understands his long relationship with Bill Clinton. He looks forward to his support when Barack Obama is the nominee." Mr. Obama has major black supporters in his own ranks, including the Rev. Jesse Jackson, a two-time presidential candidate, and Oprah Winfrey. He and Mrs. Clinton have vied intensely for support of black voters, particularly in South Carolina, which is one of the first states to vote in the presidential nominating process that begins in January.

Mrs. Clinton plans to campaign with Mr. Lewis at an event in South Carolina this evening.

In advance of the Atlanta event today, Mr. Lewis explained his endorsement in a statement, using language that reflected the Clinton campaign's political argument against Mr. Obama - that she has the most experience to be president, and that she has the relationships with world leaders to quickly strengthen alliances.

"I have looked at all the candidates, and I believe that Hillary Clinton is the best prepared to lead this country at a time when we are in desperate need of strong leadership," he said. "She will restore a greater sense of community in America, and reclaim our standing in the world."

Mr. Obama, a former state legislator who was elected to the Senate in 2004, has countered that he has the best judgment to be president - particularly given his early opposition to the Iraq war-— as well as the sort of outsider experience that Washington needs.

Political endorsements are mostly a matter of bragging rights for presidential campaigns; alone, they tend not to move blocs of voters that a candidate cannot move himself or herself. Still, endorsements can be a factor for some voters or encourage people to assess a candidate in a new or different light.

In South Carolina, the most influential black endorsement has traditionally come from Congressman James Clyburn, a leading figure in state Democratic politics. Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton, among others, have been steadily courting him; Mr. Clyburn has indicated at this point that he may not endorse a candidate before the South Carolina primary.

Clinton advisers said that Mrs. Clinton is also hoping that Mr. Lewis will give her a boost in other southern states she is targeting, such as Arkansas, Georgia, and Louisiana.

Mrs. Clinton, in her own statement today, said: "I am proud and deeply honored to have the support of John Lewis, a great American hero. John helped transform this nation, and his vital role in establishing civil rights for all Americans will never be forgotten."

Mr. Lewis joined the Student Non-violent Coordinating Committee in the early 1960s as a Freedom Rider, challenging segregation laws during visits to the South, and rose to lead the group. He also served as director of the Voter Education Project, an effort that focused on registering more minorities to vote. He was first elected to Congress in 1986 and serves as the party leadership’s senior chief deputy whip.

By Patrick Healy, The New York Times, October 12, 2007

Two New Yorkers lead the polls in California for next year's presidential election, according to a new poll released Friday by a San Jose State University research group.

Sen. Hillary Clinton leads the Democratic field by 22 percentage points while former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani has a 17 percentage point lead among Republicans, according to the new poll by the Survey and Policy Research Institute.

The poll also found President George W. Bush's approval numbers at a record low, 21 percent, among state residents- dragged down by the war in Iraq. An overwhelming majority of California residents, 68 percent, including almost half of the state's Republicans, 47 percent, say the war was not worth the cost in the new poll. "Never have this president and the war in Iraq been more unpopular. California voters seem to have largely given up on President Bush at this point, and are now looking ahead to 2008," survey director and SJSU Assistant Professor of Political Science Melinda Jackson said.

Clinton has the support of 42 percent of state Democratic voters followed distantly by Ill. Sen. Barack Obama at 20 percent and former N.C. Sen. John Edwards at 14 percent. Undecided voters also comprised 14 percent of the respondents, according to Jackson.

"Unless some disaster befalls the Clinton campaign, I just cannot see how she's not going to win, especially in California and probably the Democratic nomination," Jackson said.

Giuliani has the support of 34 percent of state Republicans followed by 17 percent for Arizona Sen. John McCain and 11 percent for former Mass. Governor Mitt Romney. Undecideds comprised 16 percent of Republican voters, Jackson said. Despite Giuliani's 17-point lead in the poll, Jackson does not think California Republicans are as settled on their choice as the Democrats are. "On the Republican side we could see some changes," Jackson said. "Romney is trending upward."

The poll was conducted by telephone between Oct. 1-8. The margin of error is plus or minus 3.8 percent. For the Democratic primary results, the margin of error is plus or minus 6.9 percent and for the Republican primary it is plus or minus 8 percent.




CBS News, October 12, 2007

CONCORD, N.H. - Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton said it would be foolish to take her name off Michigan's primary ballot and sacrifice her chances against the Republican nominee.

As the only top tier Democrat remaining on Michigan ballot, Clinton is all but guaranteed to win the state's primary. Michigan is tentatively slated to send 156 delegates to the 2008 Democratic National Convention, but national party officials have threatened to take away those delegates if the state persists in holding its primary on Jan. 15.

"It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything," Clinton said Thursday during an interview on New Hampshire Public Radio's call-in program, "The Exchange." "But I just personally did not want to set up a situation where the Republicans are going to be campaigning between now and whenever, and then after the nomination, we have to go in and repair the damage to be ready to win Michigan in 2008."

Speaking in the first primary state, Clinton said she understands concerns about her refusal. Rivals Barack Obama, John Edwards, Bill Richardson and Joe Biden took their names off Michigan's Jan. 15 primary ballot this week, and Michigan's hope for nominating clout all but evaporated.

Clinton's comment reflects an optimism she will win her party's nomination to face the Republican nominee in November 2008. She said any snub to Michigan could hurt her - and all Democrats' - chances to defeat the Republicans there.

Clinton was prompted by a caller who said, "It strikes me that this is politics as usual, where politicians say one thing and do something else." Clinton brushed aside the comment.

"I did not believe it was fair to just say, 'Goodbye Michigan' and not take into account the fact we're going to have to win Michigan if we're going to be in the White House in January 2009," she said.

The Democratic presidential candidates already had pledged not to campaign in Michigan because the state had broken Democratic National Committee rules by scheduling its primary ahead of Feb. 5. The rules ban states from holding their 2008 contests before Feb. 5, except Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina. The candidates are allowed to visit Michigan to raise money and can send their spouses to campaign, but they can't run advertisements, hold rallies or do most of the other things that would help give them a leg up on their opponents.

Clinton said she wouldn't campaign there, but isn't about to hurt her own chances.

"If you look at the some of the states we have to win, the margins have been narrow. And it wasn't, in my view, meaningful, but I'm not going to say there's an absolute, total ignoring of the people in all these other states that won't come back to haunt us if we're not careful about it."

Associated Press, October 11, 2007

DES MOINES, Iowa - For Hillary Rodham Clinton to win Iowa, she'll have to get past the men challenging her for the Democratic presidential nomination and the state's tradition of turning a cold shoulder to female candidates.

Iowa is one of only two states - Mississippi is the other - that have never sent a woman to Congress or the governor's mansion. None have been tested in Iowa's presidential caucuses; any who campaigned here dropped out before the vote.

But Clinton is campaigning in large part on her gender; she noted during a swing through the state this week that she couldn't run as anything else. She is making appeals to women and the voters who support them in subtle and direct ways.

She says she's not running because she's a woman, but because she is the most qualified and experienced person for the job. But at every stop, she used her potential to break through the ultimate glass ceiling as part of her closing argument for voters to elect her.

"I was so touched the first time I shook the hand of a woman and she reached out and grabbed my hand and said to me, `I'm 95 years old. I was born before women could vote and I'm going to live long enough to see a woman in the White House!'" Clinton said in Dakota City.

As always, the story won enthusiastic applause from the assembled Iowans. She always followed up by saying she often sees parents pointing her out and telling their daughters she was proof they could be anything they want.

The pitch allows Clinton to tell voters her candidacy would break new ground in the face of opponents who are trying to portray her as part of Washington's past.

Nationally, a September poll by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center and the Pew Forum found 12 percent said they would be less likely to support a presidential candidate who is a woman, while 15 percent said they would be likelier.

A Des Moines Register poll last Sunday showed Clinton now leading in Iowa among Democrats, with 29 percent support, up from 21 percent. John Edwards was at 23 percent, down from 29, with Barack Obama in third place at 22 percent.

Candis Drechsler of Humboldt, Iowa, had heard them all. She's seen Clinton, Obama and Edwards on their visits to her rural community in the central part of the state. She's decided to support Clinton.

"I was not initially, simply because I wonder if in office if she'll be part of the good old boy system. I hope not," Drechsler said after posing for a picture with the New York senator and asking her to help U.S. soldiers returning from Iraq with mental problems. "I just feel like she's the most capable, most credible and it's an extra bonus she's a woman."

Clinton spent two days campaigning with two of Iowa's best known political women - former first lady Christie Vilsack and Ruth Harkin, wife of Sen. Tom Harkin. The trio stopped at a Maid-Rite restaurant for its famous loose meat sandwiches, and Clinton chatted up their server, Anita Esterday. It turned out that that single mother with two grown sons was working her first day at Maid-Rite, a second job she took to help make ends meet. From then on, Clinton talked about the waitress and her struggles.

"She doesn't have much to count on when it comes to retirement except for Social Security," Clinton said in Webster City as she pitched her plan for universal 401(k) accounts. "A lot of the workers are left behind, but I think we know what to do. We just need a president who believes it's important to do it."

Iowans' desire to vote for a woman is something Roxanne Conlin hears frequently. Conlin is a co-chair of Edwards' Iowa campaign, and lost a close race for governor in 1982. She attributes the defeat to her gender. "Iowa is in some significant ways a very traditional state," Conlin said. "I see so many women who say, `For crying out loud, it's our time. We've waited so long.'" She said she and Edwards don't try to fight that desire, but they try to convince voters that he is the most electable candidate - not because he's a man, she says, but because he's won in the South. She said she points out that Clinton represents New York and has some personal baggage that might turn off Southern voters. "Electability will be a very strong factor in the mind of Iowa participants," Conlin said.

By Nedra Pickler, Associated Press, October 11, 2007

THE RACE: The presidential race for Republicans, Democrats in Florida

THE NUMBERS - DEMOCRATS

Hillary Rodham Clinton, 51 percent

Barack Obama, 17 percent

John Edwards, 10 percent

THE NUMBERS - REPUBLICANS

Rudy Giuliani, 27 percent

Fred Tompson, 19 percent

Mitt Romney, 17 percent

John McCain, 8 percent

OF INTEREST:

Clinton's hefty lead over Obama in the state is similar to the one she held last month. An impressive 44 percent of Florida Democrats say they think Clinton has the Democratic nomination locked up - but nearly the same number, 41 percent, say they have an unfavorable view of her. Giuliani's edge over Thompson remains slim, though Romney has gained slightly since September. Only 14 percent of the state's Republicans think Giuliani has clinched the nomination. Just 18 percent of Florida Republicans say they are very satisfied with the GOP presidential field, compared to the 45 percent of state Democrats very happy with their party's choices.

The telephone poll, done by Quinnipiac University, was conducted from Oct. 1-8 and involved telephone interviews with 869 Florida voters. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.3 percentage points. It included interviews with 345 Republicans and 337 Democrats, each with a sampling margin of error of plus or minus 5.3 percentage points.

Associated Press, October 10, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Hillary Rodham Clinton remains the most popular presidential contender for Democratic Party supporters in the United States, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. 42 per cent of respondents would back the New York senator in a 2008 primary.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 26 per cent-up four points in a week-followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 12 per cent. Support is lower for New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, Delaware senator Joe Biden, Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich, and Connecticut senator Chris Dodd.

Yesterday, Biden said he is the only Democratic contender who has consistently supported funding for the troops stationed in Iraq, adding, "I call on all the candidates running for the Democratic nomination for president-regardless of their differing views of how to end war in Iraq-to support our troops while they are there and as they are coming home. It is the one sacred obligation that we have to protect our men and women who are sent into battle."

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, October 10, 2007

Quinnipiac University released a new poll this morning that shows New York Sen. Hillary Clinton overwhelming Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and the rest of the Democratic primary field and slowly increasing her lead over New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, the Republican front-runner, in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Clinton's support appeared deep and wide, pollsters said. In Florida, 59 percent of her supporters said they were unlikely to change their mind. In Ohio, it was 74 percent.

Giuliani voters were less committed: no more than 39 percent in any state say they were unlikely to change their mind.

Other results:

*Clinton tops Giulini, 46-43 percent in Florida; 46-40 in Ohio; and 48-42 in Pennsylvania.

*Clinton gets 54 percent of the Democratic vote in Florida, where here closest rival, Obama, is 34 points behind. She doesn't top 50 percent in Ohio, where Obama was 28 points behind, or Pennsylvania, where he's 27 points back.

*Giuliani polled at 27 percent among Republicans in Florida, where his nearest rival, Fred Thompson, was 8 points behind. Giuliani is polling a bit better in Ohio, where he is 12 points ahead of Thompson, and PA, where Thompson and John McCain are both 19 points back.

The primary polls have a margin of error up to 5.5 percent. The general election poll has a margin of error of 3.3 percent.

By Michael C. Bender, Palm Beach Post, October 10, 2007

CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton pushed back against criticism from fellow Democrats that she is too polarizing to unite the country as president, arguing that the political battles she has been through make her uniquely equipped to bring the nation together and build a centrist governing coalition.

In an interview aboard her campaign bus, Clinton (N.Y.) acknowledged that she has contributed to the divisive politics of the past decade but said she has learned from those experiences. She said that if she becomes president, she will attempt to assemble a broad, centrist coalition on such key issues as health care, energy independence and national security.

Gov. Jennifer Granholm said today she will endorse a Democratic presidential candidate next week, and hinted it may be Hillary Clinton.

Granholm said she is "very disappointed in the candidates who chose to abandon Michigan" referring to the four or five candidates who announced Tuesday they would not campaign in Michigan because of its early primary.

Granholm said she would not back down from the Jan. 15 primary date in defiance of the National Democratic Party's rules. The party has threatened sanctions against Michigan and Florida for attempting to precede New Hampshire and Iowa in the nomination process.

Those who would remove their names from Michigan's primary ballot did so because "they were attempting to convince voters in Iowa and New Hampshire that they're more loyal to Iowa and New Hampshire than the other states," Granholm said.

Clinton has said she would keep her name on the ballot in Michigan.

Granholm commented after a media roundtable with state health care industry representatives and a few Democratic legislators who urged four of Michigan's Republican U.S. House members to override President Bush's veto of an expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP).



By Chris Christoff, Detroit Free Press, October 10, 2007

Politico: Campaign Must Do Unglamorous Political Grunt Work Iowans Have Always Expected

To most people, it looks like just a rally.

Several times a day, in rural outposts across Iowa, a local notable warms up the audience with a story, maybe the one about Bill's marriage proposal to Hillary. The senator bounds onto the stage, pitches her candidacy and concludes by working the rope line until the crowd of several hundred thins out to a few dozen.

Presidential Campaigning 101, right?

Look a little closer.

In what Clinton's campaign believes will be the key to breaking out of a three-way race with John Edwards and Barack Obama, the primary focus at 10 stops this week in Iowa was not on stagecraft or even the very famous candidate on stage. It was to get commitments from potential caucus-goers - or at the very least the names, cell phone numbers and interest level of every man, woman and (voting-age) child who came to listen but will now likely be contacted repeatedly through January.

Clinton may be ahead nationally, but in Iowa, she remains far from sealing the deal. And here that means the unglamorous political grunt work Iowans have always expected.

"We know we have a lot of work to do," said Teresa Vilmain, a longtime Iowa political operative who is Clinton's state director. Iowa is about organization, locking in supporters in 1,784 precincts who will literally stand up for Clinton in a roomful of their neighbors on caucus night and try to persuade others to join them.

This is all very new for Clinton. Her husband bypassed Iowa in the 1992 presidential campaign - favorite son Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) was in the race - leaving her to build a political network from scratch. By comparison, she got a late start. Edwards never left the state after his second-place finish in 2004, and Obama, who lives next door in Illinois, has already surpassed her in field offices. Clinton began organizing in the spring.

The way up, as her campaign sees it, is through mobilization and what her aides call "Aha!" moments - the realization from voters after meeting her that her edges aren't so sharp after all. At every stop, she tries for both.

Clinton arrives at least 15 minutes before she's scheduled to speak and withdraws to a private room, where Iowans identified as key community organizers wait to hear why they should go with her. She repeats the drill afterward with a different group. Her volunteers and staff surround the crowds like sentries, handing out and collecting pledge cards. The campaign doesn't release its rate of return, but Vilmain said that at a town square rally in Marshalltown, 300 cards were collected. "Whenever 300 people in one hour sign up, that is success," Vilmain said.

Between visits, Clinton's staff goes down its checklist. By the end of the summer, Vilmain said, they signed county coordinators, held 99 county organizing meetings, called thousands of homes and recruited "Hill-Leaders," who pledge to bring in 10 more people to caucus for Clinton.

Interviews with more than two dozen voters this week found many of them undecided, torn by a strong field of contenders, sentimental favorites and the desire to go with a winner. When asked how Clinton could land their support, the answers were as disparate as the polls themselves.

"She needs to pay more attention to moderates and independents than hard-core liberals," said Dale Evans, 53, a factory worker from Cedar Rapids. But he still likes what he sees.

"I talk to some people - men - and too many say she will not get their vote," said Linda Whittle, 63, a postal worker from Cedar Rapids, who considers Clinton her second choice after Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.). But she still thinks Clinton can win.

"I'm not that excited about Hillary Clinton at all," said Bruce Kelly, 59, a teacher at Des Moines AreCommunity College. "She is competent and knowledgeable, but do her negatives create a situation where she will bring out all the evangelical, right-wing Republicans and she will lose?" But no, he hasn't ruled her out.

So for now, Evans, Whittle and Kelly will wait. They need to be convinced. They say they will listen to her, and the others, a few more times. They will watch to see what kind of organization she builds, what kind of money she raises and which positions she stakes out.

"I can't fault a single thing she has said," Carrie Barr, a 52-year-old stay-at-home mom, said after listening to Clinton in Marshalltown. Barr received three recorded phone calls - one from Clinton, one from the wife of former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack and one from a local Democratic volunteer - reminding her about the rally.

"She has done everything right," Barr added. But don't lock her in. She's undecided.




By Carrie Budoff Brown, The Politico, October 10, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton has extended her lead over Republican Rudy Giuliani in a prospective head-to-head United States presidential contest, according to a poll by TNS released by the Washington Post and ABC News. 51 per cent of respondents would support the New York senator in next year's election, while 43 per cent would vote for the former New York City mayor.

Support for Rodham Clinton in this match-up increased by two points since September, while backing for Giuliani fell by four points.

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, October 9, 2007

CONCORD, N.H. - Don Schwartz, who describes himself as "a super-Deaniac progressive type," decided to back Hillary Clinton - whose centrist views, he concedes, do not necessarily match his own - for a simple reason. He wanted, finally, to be with a winner.

When Schwartz, the vice chairman of the Londonderry Democratic committee, started to contact his neighbors, with a goal of reaching 100 people per week, he thought he would have to appeal to their respect for her rather than their affection.

"I was actually surprised how many people said they were for Hillary," Schwartz said. "Now, they're getting to know her, and they're starting to like her. She is a nice person!"

That reaction to the kind feelings the New York senator is able to generate has been a common one in New Hampshire, where a range of Democrats said last week that they are amazed to find themselves falling for the presidential hopeful.

"I actually like her more than I thought I would," Martha LaFlanne, 49, the vice president of student affairs at New Hampshire Community Technical College in Berlin. "I think she's proven to be her own woman."

For at least a decade, the inflexibility of voter attitudes toward Clinton had come to be treated as an immutable law of American politics. On the question of Hillary, strategists of both parties concluded, voters had become split into two camps, pro and con, with firmly defined opinions, leaving few undecided and those on all sides generally unsusceptible to persuasion.

Yet over the summer, some voters appear to have changed their minds about the senator. On the key question asked by pollsters - do you view her favorably or unfavorably? - the numbers ticked in small but significant ways in Clinton's direction: a four percentage-point increase among those who like her and a three-point decrease among those who dislike her, according to an analysis of 77 surveys since early 2006 performed by Charles Franklin, a political science professor at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.

Now her favorability rating nationwide stands at 49.8 percent - on the cusp of the 50 percent threshold widely viewed as a prerequisite for a successful candidacy, according to the analysis.

The change has surprised many polling specialists who believe that it's difficult - if not impossible - to change the public perception of a very well known figure, especially reducing the numbers who view that person negatively.

Nonetheless, Franklin found that the divide in voters' views of Clinton is "hardened, but not absolutely ossified. . . . We're not even into the heart of the campaign, and there's been a good bit of movement."

That movement validates a summertime charm offensive that reintroduced Clinton to voters.

"Because Hillary Clinton is so well known as a political figure, the expectations for average voters are hard to break," said Adam Berinsky, a political scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "But in New Hampshire, voters are getting to know her better and separating their own impressions."

In many cases, Clinton's campaign has chosen - at what staff insist is the candidate's own direction - to do fewer events a day and before smaller crowds, to make a more personal appeal.
"She's taken advantage of the intimacy of the New Hampshire primaries," said state Senator Lou D'Allesandro, who has not yet endorsed a candidate.

At the beginning of the year, Clinton and Senator Barack Obama both concentrated their New Hampshire politicking on large rallies. But in late spring, partly in response to criticism that they were not connecting with individual voters, the campaigns began focusing on visits to diners and house parties, a shift observers say has particularly benefited Clinton.

"Barack is a remarkable speaker, Hillary is a good speaker," said Paul Begala, a former advisor to Bill Clinton who has contributed to Hillary Clinton's campaign fund. "But Hillary is really good in a living room."

When planning larger events, Clinton has been particularly vigilant, aides say, at making sure the schedule maintains enough time for her to linger on the rope line. "She's made it clear to us that the minimum amount of time she'll do an event will be 90 minutes, but I'm realizing the average has really been about two hours," said Nick Clemons, Clinton's New Hampshire state director. "We are trying to find the crowd size that can enable her to meet all the people there."

In August, D'Allesandro invited 200 neighbors to his Manchester yard, where Clinton addressed them from the porch and lingered long afterward in the driveway. "They were amazed that she would take her time to talk to them and have their picture taken," he said.

Working the rope line at a "fall kickoff rally" in Concord in early September, Clinton moved more slowly and deliberately than her husband, stopping in front of each person to talk while he seemed to glide from hand to hand. "She seems more human," Anna Chen, a 20-year-old Harvard junior from San Diego, said after a debate last week in Hanover. "Her laugh has gotten a lot better. Did you notice that tonight?"

To D'Allesandro, who first met Clinton in the 1980s and witnessed her during the 1992 campaign, such bonhomie is a new trait. "This is a different Hillary Clinton, let me tell you," D'Allesandro said. "I think she was shy then. Boy, has she grown on the job."

During her husband's presidency, Hillary Clinton's favorable ratings swung frequently - reaching a low in 1995 after the Republicans took over Congress and a high three years later during the Monica Lewinsky scandal - but have remained relatively steady since she entered the Senate in 2001.

According to Gallup polls conducted this year, Obama, Senator John McCain of Arizona, Pope Benedict XVI, and pop singer Christina Aguilera also have favorable ratings that hover around 50 percent. For each, however, around 20 percent of respondents said they do not know the person or were undecided. For Clinton, that figure has remained exceptionally low, around 6 percent.

"I don't think people will say they don't have mixed feelings," said Billy Shaheen, cochairman of Clinton's campaign in New Hampshire.

In trying to decide what they think of Clinton today, voters find themselves wrestling with what they thought of her yesterday, and whether it was they or she who changed in the interim, specialists said. "People are responding to the fact that they've heard one set of images repeated over and over," said Drew Westen, a psychologist at Emory University and the author of "The Political Brain."

As a result, the new impressions voters receive of Clinton are more likely to fit into the old frameworks they have for considering her, according to Westen, including the idea that even her charm may be calculated.

"I think Hillary has succeeded in helping to show her soft side," said Lee Stebbins, 61, a retired educator in Bethlehem. "I think they've softened her. I think her image is softened."

Above all, conversations about Clinton tend to engage a far deeper sense of self-awareness than those about other candidates.

Voters are often left assessing less what they think of Clinton than judging the gap between those feelings and what they believe is expected of them. "I don't think I feel I have to like her personally, said Diane McGonagle, 56, who walked from her home in Concord last week to see Obama address a rally in a public park. "I don't see why warmth is an issue."

The Boston Globe, October 9, 2007

WASHINGTON - It's over.

Barring a political catastrophe, Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic nominee for president. Her lead has become insurmountable.

Whether she will win the presidency is less certain. But at this stage, a year and a month out, it's hers to lose.

Every indicator now massively favours Ms. Clinton's campaign. In the latest national poll, released last week by The Washington Post and ABC News, she had the support of 53 per cent of Democratic voters. Challenger Barack Obama had slipped to 20 per cent, while John Edwards came in at 13 per cent.

Mr. Obama used to be able to boast that he was raising more money than Ms. Clinton, which suggested there might be a grassroots surge building. But in the third quarter, when easily available sources of fundraising have dried up and only those with deep wells can still draw water, that lead has evaporated. Ms. Clinton raised $27-million (U.S.) to Mr. Obama's $20-million.

Conventional wisdom holds that all of these advantages can turn to dust if one candidate or another does better or worse than expected in the crucial Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina caucuses and primaries in early 2008. That may not be the case this time, since half the states, including New York and California, will hold their primaries on Feb. 5, limiting the ability of dark horses to exploit early successes.

But even if conventional wisdom does hold, Ms. Clinton has as yet no reason to worry. The latest poll, released by The Des Moines Register over the weekend, has the New York senator at 29 per cent in Iowa, comfortably ahead of John Edwards (23 per cent), and Mr. Obama (22 per cent). And remember: Ms. Clinton doesn't have to win the early primaries, she just has to not lose them. Her powerful national organization will take care of the rest on Feb. 5.

Then there is the Michigan/Florida factor. Both of these states have scheduled primaries in January, in violation of national party rules. While the Republicans have shrugged off the transgression, the Democratic National Committee has penalized both states by stripping them of their delegates, and the major Democratic candidates have promised not to campaign in either state.

The results in Michigan and Florida will, however, have a powerful psychological effect. Again, the strength of her national campaign should work to Ms. Clinton's advantage in both states.

Skeptics observe that Howard Dean was comfortably in the lead in the Democratic primaries four years ago, only to come a cropper in Iowa, and that none of the big names would run for the Democratic nomination in 1992 because everyone knew president George Bush was invincible.

All perfectly true. But it is also true that campaigns can build a momentum that, at some point, becomes insurmountable. With a 30-point lead in the polls and an unmatched political organization, Senator Clinton appears to have achieved that momentum.

How did she do it? There may be three factors. First, the organization. The Clintons built a formidable political machine to advance Bill Clinton's presidential prospects, and Ms. Clinton inherited that machine.

Second, the husband. Bill Clinton was a highly popular president, and that popularity was enhanced by the travails of his successor. Voters appear to approve of his presence, and look forward to having him back in the White House as first gentleman.

Third, the end of ideology. National polls report that voters are fed up with the ideological divide that has formed between the Democratic and Republican parties. They want a president who can get things done, who can navigate legislation through Congress, who will balance the budget, who will get the United States out of Iraq without giving away the store to the terrorists, who can fix the health-care mess and improve the schools and mend the broken infrastructure.

Hillary Clinton's greatest asset is experience. She would be one of the best qualified presidents ever to inherit the office, having spent eight years in the White House and eight in the Senate. She knows the system and can work it. That, more than anything else, may be the secret of her appeal.

Critics warn that if the Democrats do nominate Ms. Clinton, they are headed for certain defeat the following November, because she cannot draw soft Republican voters. They cite polls in which 45 per cent of voters say they view Hillary Clinton unfavorably.

But that leaves 55 per cent who like her fine. And those critics have to answer a question of their own: Who in the Republican field can beat her?

Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney has impeccable credentials in business and government. But his Mormon faith and his previous support for abortion and gay marriage have alienated the social-conservative base of the party, and he trails badly in national polls.

Former New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani, the front-runner, is equally unpopular with social conservatives, while actor and former senator Fred Thompson's late arrival has thus far sparked neither light nor heat.

In any case, whoever confronts Ms. Clinton will also have to confront the legacy of the past seven years, which has left the Republican Party divided and dispirited. The Democrats have out-fundraised the Republicans $230-million to $149-million.

For Hillary Clinton to lose the nomination, and turn this prognostication to dust, she will have to commit a political mistake of enormous magnitude. Revelations of an affair, say, or of shady fundraising tactics won't be sufficient. The political market has already discounted the possibility.

She would have to ... actually, it is impossible to imagine, right now, what it would take for Hillary to lose.

By John Ibbitson, The Globe and Mail, October 9, 2007

Senator Easily Outrunning Other Democrats In Northeast

WASHINGTON - Hillary Rodham Clinton is the Northeast's favorite daughter, a status that's likely to give her important early strength in this winter's Democratic primaries and caucuses.

"Clinton has a tremendous advantage in the Northeast," said Darrell M. West, director of the Taubman Center for Public Policy at Brown University in Providence, an advantage unusual in the past 30 years or so, when candidates haven't been able to assume that their home base would support them.

Her edge could be a huge help, first because of New Hampshire, where the latest Granite State Poll, taken Sept. 17-24, put her ahead of Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, her closest rival, by 23 points.

She is also far ahead in other key early states in the region: A Quinnipiac Polling Institute New Jersey poll in September put Clinton ahead of Obama, 46 percent to 15 percent.

In Pennsylvania, she topped him 42 percent to 24 percent in a Strategic Vision poll Sept. 28-30.

And in New York, where she was re-elected to the Senate in a landslide last year, the latest Siena College poll shows that the state is comfortably hers.

Those bulges help cement her status as the national front-runner, although no one is saying this early in the presidential game that Clinton is unbeatable among Democrats in the region, where long-shot Connecticut Sen. Christopher J. Dodd, another favorite son, continues to stump hard in New Hampshire and often stresses his New England roots.

And experts still don't regard geography as the built-in advantage it once was, when a favorite son was assured of strong support from his home and neighboring states and other candidates stayed out of his way. Today, though, "it takes more than [local roots] to be seen as a viable presidential candidate," said Merle Black, professor of politics and government at Emory University in Atlanta.

Black and others trace the beginning of the end of the days of favorite sons to 1980, when Massachusetts Sen. Edward M. Kennedy lost decisively in New Hampshire and Vermont, two critical early primaries, to Jimmy Carter, the former Georgia governor with the distinctive drawl. The trend continued in the general election, when Carter lost every Deep South state but his own to Californian Ronald Reagan. And, Black said, Carter drew only about 35 percent of the southern white vote that year, down from 47 percent in 1976. In the years that followed, there were other examples. Vice President Al Gore couldn't carry Tennessee when he ran for president in 2000. Four years later, John Edwards, then a North Carolina senator, failed to swing his own state into the Democratic column when he ran for vice president.

Clinton, though, seems to have a near-lock on the nine states that define the Northeast - the New England and Middle Atlantic states - a potentially formidable advantage, since five of those states, including Connecticut, New Jersey and New York, hold primaries or caucuses within the first few weeks of next year's nominating season.

What propels Clinton to the top, analysts said, is that her New York ties help in both obvious and subtle ways. Obvious because as a senator representing the state for the past six and a half years, "people see her here, and they think she wears well. They also know what she's done for New York," said Lee M. Miringoff, director of the Marist [N.Y.] Institute for Public Opinion.

They see her on local television constantly, not only in New York, but in much of Connecticut, New Jersey and Rhode Island. They see her talking about helping victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks or seeking more money to untangle the traffic in and out of New York City.

More subtly, residents of the region see her talking about terrorism in nuanced ways, said Julian E. Zelizer, professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University.

"You have a lot of liberal voters in the region," he said, and they like her record. But they also like that "she understands the complexity behind the war on terrorism." Ins