Previewing Tonight's Democratic Debate

Thursday, November 15, 2007

HORSERACE, JOHN EDWARDS, HILLARY CLINTON, BILL RICHARDSON, BARACK OBAMA

So how big is tonight for Hillary Rodham Clinton?

Iowa looks neck and neck and neck once again. She’s lost a little ground in New Hampshire and some would contend nationally. (The last debate was October 30. Since then, CNN has her down 7 percent. But several pollsters who have taken national samples – Gallup, ARG, Cook/RT - have her about the same as the previous one before that debate.)

There’s plenty of material if A) her opponents have the guts to make the charge, and weren’t scared off by the ‘piling on’ charge and B) Wolf Blitzer isn’t afraid to follow in Russert’s footsteps and get denounced afterwards.

(It's not going to be 6 on 1, because Bill Richardson will be eager to try for the veepstakes by defending Hillary. He won't help her cause much, but count on him to scold the others for 'piling on' at some point.)

(And no Mike Gravel tonight, once again.)

The reason Hillary found herself in trouble in the last debate was that Russert asked a question where she was caught between a political ally (Spitzer) and her instincts on one side and the majority of public opinion on the other. She hedged, saying that she understood why he did it, that she thought it was a good idea, but insisted she had never said she supported the idea. Edwards called her out on having “two positions in two minutes” and Dodd actually had the guts to say it was a bad idea, because a driver’s license is a privilege. In retrospect, Obama demonstrated what is becoming his trademark capacity to flee from the jugular instead of going for it.

For example – yesterday Obama's spokesman Bill Burton, said, "When it takes two weeks and six different positions to answer one question on immigration, it's easier to understand why the Clinton campaign would rather plant their questions than answer them."

If Obama says that tonight, jackpot. It will be the sound-bite of the night. But I don’t see him doing it. He loves his ‘nice guy’ image too much.

Potential targets of opportunity for Hillary's rivals:

Did her supporters urge Gov. Spitzer to drop the driver’s license for illegal immigrants plan?
Planting questioners?
As the Wall Street Journal notes, "A week ago, the former first lady finally announced that she'd support the U.S.-Peru trade agreement that passed the House last week with 109 Democratic votes. But then on Monday in Iowa, speaking to the United Auto Workers, she declared that if elected President she would call a "time out" on trade deals." So – the U.S. Peru trade agreement – does that get in before the “time out” or afterwards?

Edwards will go after her for taking more money from “special interests” than any other candidate, but until he says, like he did at the Kos candidate forum, ‘how can you do this?’ and force her into responding by defending lobbyists as representing ‘ordinary people,’ I don’t see her losing too much ground on this issue.

It’s got to be something she absolutely has to respond to, not something she can dismiss with, "oh, Wolf, I don't even want to dignify that with a response." I'm not sure if something like this line will be enough:

"Senator Clinton was talking about China and she said, 'Our problem with China is they have all this American debt. It's hard to be tough on your banker,' " Edwards told a crowd in Charles City, Iowa, last week. "Senator Clinton has raises more money from the health-care industry than any Democratic or Republican presidential candidate. I agree with her: It's tough to take on your banker."

11/15 12:40 PM Share