Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

A Diligent Clinton Keeps Her Head Down


Hillary Clinton tries to blend into the background. (Getty Images).

By Dan Balz
DES MOINES -- Hillary Clinton will close out nearly a year of campaigning in Iowa with a New Year's Eve rally in downtown Des Moines late Monday night. It will be glitzy and splashy and will feature her most significant surrogate, her husband the former president.

But what is striking about the final days of one of the most fascinating campaigns any of us have witnessed here in Iowa is how Clinton has avoided becoming the focus of attention. The national front-runner has become, if not invisible, virtually ignored -- and that seems just the way she wants it.

Barack Obama and John Edwards have zeroed in on one another. Joe Biden, Bill Richardson and Chris Dodd hunger for attention. Clinton is methodically moving around the state, saying the same thing at virtually every stop. She has given a few interviews, but made little news.

The style is classic Hillary Clinton, the girl with the responsibility gene, the always-prepared student who never skips her homework. Her final days in Iowa are as disciplined as they are unexceptional -- except perhaps where it counts, in reaching out to Iowa voters. (But that we will not know until Thursday night.)

The campaigns are drowning in data but no one is certain about where the Democratic race is heading. Everyone here awaits the release of the Des Moines Register's final poll, which historically has been accurate in the order of finish, if not always the margins between the candidates.

But polling here is more treacherous than ever. Christmas interrupted opportunities to poll early last week. The weekend is never a good time to poll and particularly difficult between Christmas and New Year's. And the last days of the caucus campaign will be overtaken by celebrations ringing in the election year.

Beyond that, Iowans have stopped answering their phones. One Democrat estimated that proven caucusgoers are getting as many as 15 telephone calls a night from campaigns and pollsters. A young man I spoke to on Sunday night, who said he has attended more than 50 candidate events over the past year, said he gets about half a dozen each evening. Conditions for polling, as a result, couldn't be worse.

The campaigns are making their own phone calls to supporters and to undecided voters. They are working off elaborate and sophisticated targeting projections. The campaigns have their vote goals and all claim to be on track to meeting them. But all are based on assumptions of how large the turnout will be on Thursday -- and there the range of estimates is so large as to be laughable.

Eight years ago, just 59,000 Iowans participated in the Democratic caucuses. Four years ago that doubled to 124,181. This year estimates run to 140,000 or 160,000 -- or in the guesstimate of former Iowa Democratic chair (and Obama senior adviser) Gordon Fischer, up to 200,000 -- an astounding figure, but one which Fischer believes is plausible given the intensity that has been evident here for a year.

So campaign vote goals could be rendered virtually useless if there is an enormous surge in turnout on Thursday night. Everyone could hit their targets and find the numbers meaningless. In the face of that uncertainty, having a game plan and executing it is crucial, which is what all the campaigns believe they are doing.

But who would have guessed that Clinton would have avoided becoming the target in the final days in Iowa?

It has been long assumed that a victory here by the former first lady could start her on an unstoppable march to the nomination. In truth, the Democratic campaign has been surprisingly lacking in attack ads and negative campaigning. The Republican contest between Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney has become far more negative in tone than the three-way battle among Clinton, Obama and Edwards.

One reason is that the risks of launching attacks in a three-way contest are far greater than in a two-way battle. Another is that Iowans genuinely like all the Democratic candidates and aren't anxious to see someone begin tearing down the others.

Bill Clinton made that point again Sunday night when he spoke in Carlisle, Iowa, just outside Des Moines. He likes all the candidates, he said, but Iowans have to decide which of them they think would make the best president.

There is a workaday quality to the Clinton message -- to the messages of both Clintons actually. Call it bread-and-butter or kitchen-table economics, but the Clintons have never forgotten what got Bill Clinton to the White House.

What got them there was a relentless focus on the middle class and a list of programmatic solutions aimed at easing the economic anxiety that many Americans felt then and feel today -- and the Clintons are still focused on such concerns.

Bill Clinton spoke for an hour on Sunday night, weaving together his wife's accomplishments (with some embellishment) over 35 years and his own record as president. He talked for 45 minutes before he managed to get to his wife's years in the Senate.

His speech was laced with policy past and future (he described how he and his wife solved so many problems that it begged the question of why there is still so much left for a Clinton presidency to do).

Hillary Clinton is doing the same in her own way at stop after stop in Iowa, head down, avoiding the chattering class. "We're locked and loaded on our message," said Howard Wolfson, Clinton's communications director. "Other candidates are making news by attacking other candidates. They're going to run their race. The race we're going to run is focusing people on who's ready to be president."

Clinton took hits earlier in the race and suffered from her own missteps. She and Obama have sparred over the past week on the questions of experience and change. Obama has tried to engage her further but has been distracted by the rise of Edwards -- leaving Clinton largely free to move through the state without distractions.

Who would have guessed that the person everyone wants to beat in Iowa would be finishing 2007 this way?

By Web Politics Editor  |  December 31, 2007; 2:01 PM ET
Categories:  A_Blog , Dan Balz's Take , Hillary Rodham Clinton  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Undecided and Down to the Wire
Next: Huckabee's Televised Turnabout

Comments

[URL=http://www.albudab.org/paris-champs-elysees.php] Paris champs elysees [/URL] Paris champs elysees

Posted by: Mindy | April 19, 2008 1:17 AM | Report abuse

[URL=http://www.sonty.net/markus-schenkenberg.php] Markus schenkenberg [/URL] Markus schenkenberg

Posted by: Simon | April 18, 2008 3:29 AM | Report abuse

[URL=http://www.ajaxlinki.com/swimming-pools.php] Swimming pools [/URL] Swimming pools

Posted by: Johanna | April 12, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

[URL=http://www.busbenchrevolution.com/master-design-industriale-italia.php] Master design industriale italia [/URL] Master design industriale italia

Posted by: Mary | April 8, 2008 6:45 AM | Report abuse

An opinion of why Hillary Clinton edged Obama in the New Hampshire primary

Notwithstanding that all the polls predicted a decisive victory by Obama in last Tuesday's primary election, a rush of last minute mind changes gave Clinton the upper hand. Much has been written about the reasons why this happened. A plausible explanation can be found in the day before voting when MSNBC aired all morning a statement attributed to Bill Clinton, while campaigning in Heniker, New Hampshire. Clinton purposely played the poor-little-woman card on behalf of Hillary. He said in a less-than-flattering way "I can't make her any younger, taller or change her gender." This unkind remark was just too much for Hillary. She was no longer the front runner and it looked like all her hopes and aspirations were doomed. And on top of everything her own husband had said that about her. Later on she had an emotional encounter on TV which left her almost in tears, adding to the pity factor. My wife an don't like Hillary (like millions of other people). I did not feel sorry for Hillary, but my wife could not help feeling sorry for her. If Bill had added the word "thinner" when he said "...any younger, taller...", she may have won in a landslide with the help of the uneducated masses with no mind of their own, except for watching TV as their only source of knowledge. Well done ex-President Clinton! This is how you won past elections. You administered Hillary the right medicine. It was a painful medication for her but it worked. A last day change of heart motivated by pity made enough female voters vote for her, making her a winner. However, you must realize that you can do this only once. For example, if you were to say to us again that "you did not have sexual relations with that woman (Monica Lewinsky)" we would not believe or excuse you. For the oncoming primaries you are going to think of other political dirty tricks to help Hillary. She'll need them. However, in the end Barack Obama will beat Hillary despite her many years of experience (including her year in kindergarten).

Posted by: Fred10 | January 12, 2008 11:23 AM | Report abuse

I'm fed up w/ the Bush and Clinton dynasties. Hillary isn't the "chosen one." (She may feel as if she deserves the crown because she put up w/ Bill's affairs, but that was her bargain -- not mine.) Her First Lady experience doesn't qualify her for the Presidency. In terms of qualifications, she's a two-term senator from NY. And her vote/support of the Iraq War as senator puts her judgment into question. (Hillary likes to argue that it's the HOW of the war that's the problem. No. It's the WHY that's the problem (PNAC, oil, and U.S. domination).

Posted by: pmhebert | January 1, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

Mr Anyanwu do you have faith or at least are you able to accept that Americans can consider an African American for President and then pick someone else. Mr. Obama is not qualified. If he would actually do the job he has been elected to do for his consituents in Illinoi, people might be more likely to vote for him. I like to vote for the hardest workers, and I'm sorry but that's Hillary Clinton. While Mr. obama talks about Afghanistan and what he would do as Presdent, he is the chair the Senate committee that is responsible for NATO and has never convened it. NATO is responsible for hte mission in Afghanistan and it is failing. I'm sorry I have no respect for this man and his attacks on Clinton alluding she had something to do with Bhutto's death and demeaning all women with his comment about drinking tea. I am less likely to support him 8 years from now due to his candidacy and comments this time. He is not entitled to this nomination because he is black. By the way why is his grandmother living in a small hut in Africa, while he has just bought a 1.9 million dollar house? Am I supposed to believe she doesnt want running water and electricity? No sir this man should not be President and I dont believe he even knows anything about places like Afghanistan or cares to.

Posted by: slbk | January 1, 2008 10:22 AM | Report abuse

The Des Moines Register released its final poll of Iowa Democrats ahead of Thursday's caucuses.
The headline: "Obama widens lead over Clinton."
Here are the numbers:

Barack Obama 32%
Hillary Clinton 25%
John Edwards 24%
Here is a of quote from the accompanying article in todays's morning's paper:

"The findings mark the largest lead of any of the Democratic candidates in the Register's poll all year.

We are now going to turn the page on all of these Bush and Clinton dynasties (nepotism at its worse)!

Have a happy new year and a "Hillaryless" one.

Posted by: Fred10 | January 1, 2008 7:22 AM | Report abuse

"The style is classic Hillary Clinton". Actually, the style is more reminiscent of former Virginia Senator George Allen. In the last days of his campaign he could not seem to open his mouth without inserting foot. His handlers took to disallowing any unscripted questions and generally not letting him talk in public, at all.

Hillary appears to have the same foot-in-mouth problem, except this time it's not just the candidate, it's coming from her husband and her co-chairs.

You can't run for public office and hide out. It didn't work for George Allen, it won't work for Hillary. If this is how she intends to win she can take her place alongside George Allen in the losers corner.

Posted by: xcrunner771 | January 1, 2008 7:10 AM | Report abuse

Whenever Dan Balz actually starts writing the truth about the Clinton's, I will pay attention. They are two of the most corrupt politicians that have ever served in this country. And the only reason "Bubba" got elected in '92 was Ross Perot. Bill Clinton is a disgraced, impeached, degenerate and "Slick Hilly" was the "First Enabler". Their "buy one, get one free" legacy is "Juvenile Delinquency" and Dan Balz and every other journalists knows it, but keep pretending otherwise. America is getting ready to witness all the closet racists in the Democrat party turn on Obama. Bill Clinton.....A Rhodes Scholar that did not know the definition of "is" and that is perfectly acceptable BS. Both of them are pathetic people. Monica is the one that kept her head down and Hillary enabled it all.

Posted by: m-a-c | January 1, 2008 6:16 AM | Report abuse

As an African American, I have full faith, that Americans, of all ethnic and racial groups would give Sen. Obama a fair consideration, when casting their votes for the Presidency. This would confirm to the rest of the world, that, we Americans, believe in equal opportunity and merit.

What saddens me, though, are a bunch of so-called African American "leaders", like Andrew Young, Charles Rangle, Jesse Jackson Sr., Al Sharpton, Shelby Steele and others, whose utterances about the candidacy of Sen. Obama, are so despicable, they should not even be referred to as African American leaders. Their minds are so warped, that they believe, an African American cannot win the presidency, because, we, Americans are so racist that a majority would not vote for Sen. Obama. The above individuals and the likes of them, should understand, that, our country has made significant progress on race relations and equal opportunity, though, there are still grounds for further progress. The thinking of these individuals is inherently, racist and dangerous.

Let us, all Americans, go out on election day, and cast our votes for Sen. Obama, as the best candidate to lead our country, and teach Charles Rangle, Andrew Young, Jesse Jack Sr., Shelby Steele, Al Sharpton and other small-minded people like them, a good lesson -that, we are a different American society, than the one they used to know, and we are proud of that fact. Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and voters in other states would get that trend going for Sen. Obama.

Sen. Obama: we are fired up and ready to go!!

Ignatius Anyanwu
Folsom, California.

Posted by: ICA2101 | January 1, 2008 3:52 AM | Report abuse

As an African American, I have full faith, that Americans, of all ethnic and racial groups would give Sen. Obama a fair consideration, when casting their votes for the Presidency. This would confirm to the rest of the world, that, we Americans, believe in equal opportunity and merit.

What saddens me, though, are a bunch of so-called African American "leaders", like Andrew Young, Charles Rangle, Jesse Jackson Sr., Al Sharpton, Shelby Steele and others, whose utterances about the candidacy of Sen. Obama, are so despicable, they should not even be referred to as African American leaders. Their minds are so warped, that they believe, an African American cannot win the presidency, because, we, Americans are so racist that a majority would not vote for Sen. Obama. The above individuals and the likes of them, should understand, that, our country has made significant progress on race relations and equal opportunity, though, there are still grounds for further progress. The thinking of these individuals is inherently, racist and dangerous.

Let us, all Americans, go out on election day, and cast our votes for Sen. Obama, as the best candidate to lead our country, and teach Charles Rangle, Andrew Young, Jesse Jack Sr., Shelby Steele, Al Sharpton and other small-minded people like them, a good lesson -that, we are a different American society, than the one they cannot seem to appreciate.

Sen. Obama: we are fired up and ready to go!!

Ignatius Anyanwu
Folsom, California.

Posted by: ICA2101 | January 1, 2008 3:49 AM | Report abuse

From: http://www.southernpoliticalreport.com/storylink_1231_103.aspx :

"December 31, 2007... Using the reallocation methodology InsiderAdvantage used in 2004 - which correctly indicated a fairly comfortable win for John Kerry - our new poll reveals that, if the caucuses were held today, the reallocated final outcome would be:
Edwards: 41%
Clinton: 34%
Obama: 25%"

Posted by: Indeendent | January 1, 2008 1:29 AM | Report abuse

Despite the media wetting themselves over the Des Moines Register poll, two other polls released today (Reuters/Zogby and Insider Advantage) show Hillary ahead by 4-5 points. If I were Obama and his supporters I would re-cork the champaigne, cause by the time it's all over, Obama will be back in the Senate and Hillary will be accepting the nomination:)

Posted by: devin79 | January 1, 2008 12:13 AM | Report abuse


I detect a new Republican dirty trick campaign tonight, haven't seen it this blatant in recent WaPo threads. Their goal of course is to dirty trick Hillary in the primaries to boost Obama, where they can post this racist stuff for real in the general campaign.

About every other post in this thread is about the Clintons being racist, etc. against Obama. Appears to be a whispering campaign, very consistent posts. Different handles but same MO.

Dirty tricks ain't going to work this time, Republicans. I'm very proud of our Democratic candidates and the great campaigns they are running to be chosen as the next President of the United States.

I agree with poster above that any of Clinton, Biden, or Dodd have the qualifications to be President and the experience to handle the whole gamut of emergencies that the Republicans have dumped on us.

I support Hillary but the poster is right. We need 60 votes in the Senate and a Democratic president with an intense agenda to straighten up a huge Bush Cheney mess.

Go Hillary! Go Democrats 2008, President, House, and Senate.

rd

Posted by: ralphdaugherty | December 31, 2007 11:16 PM | Report abuse

Recent Iowa poll results:

Obama - 32%
HRC - 25%
John Edwards - 24%

Source: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071231/NEWS09/71231044

Posted by: Indeendent | December 31, 2007 11:02 PM | Report abuse

Take Hillary's word and her own interpretation for her wonderfulness,
because that's all she offers you is her word and interpretation, since the facts are locked up, to her satisfaction, in the Clinton library, until which time they can be sanitized, disposed of, or perfected before distribution.

Nothing is known about Hillary that isn't hear-say. The only documentation on record of her work pertains to her obvious catastrophies, and the rest your eyes will never see in time to cast an informed vote, which is just where she wants Iowans on Thursday evening - remaining ignorant.

Posted by: Rita2 | December 31, 2007 10:03 PM | Report abuse

No matter what HRC's campaign strategy is, she won't be able to disguise her real personality and intentions. Simply put she can easily become a Hellary President.

Posted by: Indeendent | December 31, 2007 9:51 PM | Report abuse

Good grief, is there anyone posting this evening who is an actual Democrat and planning to caucus in Iowa or vote in New Hampshire?

From what I can see, it looks like most of you are repubs wearing sheep's clothing to try to influence. (No insult intended to sheep who give us something useful like wool)

Tough tootsies, you're getting a bit too obvious.

Posted by: mkolb | December 31, 2007 9:42 PM | Report abuse

The people of Iowa are noticing Hillary's low profile as she refuses to take questions at her campaign events.http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071231/NEWS/71231010

Posted by: fatboysez | December 31, 2007 9:41 PM | Report abuse

Nice try Julieds. HILLARY HAS WON IN FAR MORE MATCH-UPS WITH REPUBLICANS WHICH HAS MADE YOU SCARED TO DEATH. I love how Repubs latch on to a few polls comparitive with almost an entire year of polling just to bring her down. Americans are smarter than that. Remember, the majority of the public don't read the opinions posted online bloggers. They, unlike us, still can feel without lame completely unfounded attempts like this to sway them.

Posted by: nebdem08 | December 31, 2007 9:33 PM | Report abuse

Only Mr. Balz could consider this a "fascinating" campaign. We are being offered the sorriest, most self-serving bunch of creeps (I'm being bipartisan here) of my rather lengthy lifetime. There is not an iota of truth or sincerity or greatness in any of the so-called top tier candidates of either party. They all say what they think will appeal to the greatest number of voters and they all share the same quality--an all encompassing lust for power that knows no bounds. They have at heart only their own aggrandizement--certainly not the welfare of the United States of America

I am more repulsed by this bunch of lowlifes than I have ever been in my life.

Posted by: nicekid | December 31, 2007 9:32 PM | Report abuse

blaz;

hillary rodham-clinton is never a girl: senator clinton is merely a women unless you are a pre-pubescent boy -- you lack journalistic integrity and are certainly not a journalist. washington post tolerates pathetic writers that articulate their selfish motives.

Posted by: egalitaire | December 31, 2007 9:20 PM | Report abuse

blaz;

hillary rodham-clinton is never a girl: senator clinton is merely a women unless you are a pre-pubescent boy -- you lack journalistic integrity and are certainly not a journalist. washington post tolerates pathetic writers that articulate their selfish motives.

Posted by: egalitaire | December 31, 2007 9:19 PM | Report abuse

I guess I missed something. Just what exactly is the event that gives rise to the charge that Hillary is running a campaign with racial undertones?

Posted by: rblackbird | December 31, 2007 9:16 PM | Report abuse

That's great Hillary! Keep sleeping because when you wake up Edwards will be the nominee and that will save America from more Clinton's embarrassments.

Posted by: bluelagoon21 | December 31, 2007 9:14 PM | Report abuse

Ombudsman1, you seem to be so intent on your bashing of Hillary that your irrationality shows like the bra-strap under your spaghetti-strap dress. The issue of "illegal aliens" is a priority only for you right-wingers who need to be against someone or something to justify your forays into politics...the rest of us are more interested in what and who we can be FOR. Just to show you how big an issue your red herring about Hillary "not articulating her view on 'illegal aliens'" is, your chief fearmonger, Tom Tancredo, withdrew a few weeks ago. Guess it isn't even THAT big of an issue for the Repugnantcants. Now go rejoin Oscar in his trashcan.

Posted by: winngerald | December 31, 2007 9:13 PM | Report abuse

Krugman doesn't like Obama because's he's tall. Krugman has small mans disease

Posted by: fatboysez | December 31, 2007 9:10 PM | Report abuse

What is all of this crap going around about the Clintons being "racist" and Hillary being a "carpetbagger"? Given that Obama's mother was caucasian, and everything non-nucleic in an embryo comes from mother, Obama is more caucasian than African. When we in Illinois VOTED for him, his racial makeup and heritage had nothing to do with the vote--we voted for the best candidate (which wasn't difficult, considering his opponent was Alan Keyes). As a matter of fact, both Obama AND Keyes are not native Illinoisans--Obama from Hawaii and Keyes from Maryland--but you didn't hear us complaining that we had two carpetbaggers to choose from.

My point is that Illinois has already shown the country the way--not necessarily by voting for Obama, but by voting for the best qualified candidate to do the job, regardless of race, regardless of origin, and (as we also showed by sending Carol Mosely Braun to the Senate in the past) regardless of GENDER. I suggest that the people in here who seem to make up user ID's in order to post unsubstantiated rubbish...go crawl back into their garbage cans. Hillary is obviously the best qualified and most experienced of the major candidates, and I wish her all the best on Thursday.

Posted by: winngerald | December 31, 2007 9:04 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Unhinged:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmTG0NISOPQ

This ad will kill her by New Hampshire.
Sure she's keeping her head down. When is the National Press going to ask the BIG question?

Posted by: fugeddabowdid | December 31, 2007 8:35 PM | Report abuse

The majority will decide. It's all in the numbers.

Posted by: lindafranke1952 | December 31, 2007 8:28 PM | Report abuse

They're all great candidates. Good luck dems, we're gonna need you in the white house. May the best person win. :)

Posted by: jessi_lc | December 31, 2007 8:28 PM | Report abuse

If we elect Hillary, it'll be proof that as dumb as we were electing Bush in 2004, we're even dumber in 2008.

Hillary actually has no credentials to lead. She's smarter than Bush, but what does that mean? The bar is set pretty low.

She can't even articulate where she stands on illegal aliens. How could she possible do something complicated? Or perhaps the idea of taking a stand on an issue that requires more than looking at a poll is too difficult for her?

No, vote for her at the country's peril. She'll probably put Al Gore in charge of the Internet. If the polls indicated that was a good idea, I mean.

I have to assume the people who post continuously in the WaPo's forums are paid astroturfers. They're doing a worse job than Hillary, if you can believe that.

I only ask one thing... please somebody tell why her face looks more and more bizarre each month. She looks so disturbing now...

Posted by: Ombudsman1 | December 31, 2007 8:25 PM | Report abuse

Is it just me, or is the HEADline of this article a hillarious double entendre???

Thanks for one of the last out loud laughs in 2007, Dan & WP Editors!!!

Posted by: yesharvardsucks | December 31, 2007 8:09 PM | Report abuse

I love this post:

let's face it -- all, that is ALL, of the Democratic candidates are qualified, interesting, intelligent, caring. And all, yes ALL of the Republicans are pandering and unrealistic about the war, about health care,about education, about corporate greed. so those of you who shout racist about Hillary are being silly. c'mon. and if you say you'll stay home if she gets the Dem nomination you are cutting off your nose to spite your face. We absolutely don't want another Republican for the next 50 years. or forever for that matter. We Dems have to stick together and not be dragged into the backbiting and nastiness of Republicans. we don't want to turn ourselves into Karl Roves. Whoever wins the Dem nomination deserves to be supported by all of us. don't get duped into being as negative, divisive and stupid as the Republicans. ...
Posted by: hagueacademic

--------------

woot!

Posted by: john9 | December 31, 2007 8:09 PM | Report abuse

My name is Elizabeth, and I am a Des Moines resident. The times are intense, and the phone won't stop ringing off the hook. I am so dumbstruck that Hillary has decided to gag order herself. I think this is a terrible stradegy. As Iowans, we expect our potential leader to speak and answer all questions. I wonder if the Des Moines Register is put off by endorsing someone who decided to stop talking? Moreso, not answering? I was in New Hampshire this past week, and saw Bill speak there. I've also been to Hillary's headquarters in New Hampshire. I do like her environmental plans, and am also opposed to undocumented licensing. But I have been so put off by the people working for her, and the people supporting her. I've been elbowed several times in crowds, and looked at suspiciously when I walk in with a film crew saying, "I'd like to help your campaign, if you are willing to give me answers." Not impressed. Time to speak, and time is running out.

www.purplestates.tv and www.newyorktimes.com

Elizabeth

Posted by: ligrimzz02 | December 31, 2007 8:05 PM | Report abuse

Putanesque Bill. If he is returned to the white house and becomes a member of the inner circle, will he once again have interns on his executive staff?

Posted by: rahaha | December 31, 2007 8:04 PM | Report abuse

This is a horrible way to pick the most powerful person in the world for the next 4 to 8 years.

What person with a healthy ego and value system would go through this? At some fundamental level, none of them are really qualified, or the "most" qualified.

We should start thinking about changing the process to a more parliamentary system where congress gets to elect the president, or something... or pundits get to elect based on polling numbers where no actual vote takes place, like the Star Trek episode where a computer determines in a virtual war scenario if you were hit and killed, and thus required to actually voluntarily get liquidated. There may be other options too.

Posted by: ben2 | December 31, 2007 7:57 PM | Report abuse

You People Aren't Anybody's Fans Because Most Of You Who Are On This Site Are Rethugs,You Can Tell By All The Negative Slander She's Getting,She Has Been Quite For The Last Couple Day's And She Still Get Crucified,Why Is This Because The Republicans Don't Want Her For An Opponent,People Don't Even Degrade The Repub Candidates,The Way They Are Attacking Hilliary Clinton,And To Top This Most Of You Think You Know This Woman Personnaly,And I Very Seriously Doubt This.I'am Not Sure If Some Of You In Here Are Democrats Or Not,But Don't Be Fooled By These Republicans Swiftboating BS,If For Some Reason You Are Democrats,Then We Are In Trouble.Because The Repub Has Already Won In Turning Democrats Against Each Other.If You Don't Like Senator Clinton Then Don't Vote For her,Don't Try And Make it Sound like You Know Her Background,Because You Don't.The Republicans Are Sitting Back Not Having To Critisize The Democrats,Because You Fools Are Doing It For Them,By That Time It'll Be The General Elections,And They Will Have All The Ammonition They Need In Care Of The Democrats Themselves.Fact Of The Matter Is People That Matters Have Already Given Senator Clinton For Most Experience Of All The Candidates,Look At All Her Endorsements,It's A Done Deal,All This Proff You Ask For Is Not An Issue Anymore,It's Obamanics( And It Just Want Do),Sounds Familiar I'am Not Going To Degrade Mr Obama But The 35 Years Of Political Exp. That Senator Clinton Has Outweighs The Few Years That Mr Obama Has,And You Can't Reasonably Deny That,But Like I Said It's A Done Deal Listen To Your Constituents As To Why They Support Senator Clinton,(She's RIGHT FOR THE JOB) And That's My Bottom Line Like It Or Not It's The Truth.

Posted by: Cedriclydellduncan196047gmailcom | December 31, 2007 7:34 PM | Report abuse

Hillary wants to be president first, then considers answers to policy questions second. Unprincipled and in bed with selective special interests with big bucks. Not another 8 years of Clintons.

Posted by: cpalmer | December 31, 2007 7:28 PM | Report abuse

Kudos to those who recognize the racist idealogue that Hil and her husband hold, always did hold while in office.

The way they are blundering, it shows that Ron Brown was a major brain in the Bill Cli nton Presidential administration, and he and his entire staff were killed without investigation which seems so odd. Ron Brown was understood to have certain truths under his belt as well as his intelligence.

Some suspected Clinton, but with the hatchet job they are trying on Obama it's evident, Ron Brown was like Karl Rove in the Bush presidential admin.

Blacks, yeah wake up! 2007 has been the year of the truth, and 2008, a year of new beginnings!!!

See the light, it's bright and in your face!

Posted by: scheduler | December 31, 2007 7:21 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: lambert_strether1 | December 31, 2007 7:17 PM | Report abuse

Well folks WaPo has decided to let us post http links.
HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR!
YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR!
HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR!
YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Posted by: harried | December 31, 2007 7:10 PM | Report abuse

That's just the point: Billary doesn't give us any meaningful answers. Her answers are Clintonesque in their evasiveness. Thats bascically her campaign. One night she's for drivers licenses for illegals, wakes up to realize thats not too popular with the public, and lo and behold, the next night shes not for drivers licenses for illegals. And so it goes. Its time for this pinch faced bag to get lost and leave us alone.

Posted by: birvin9999 | December 31, 2007 6:50 PM | Report abuse

Boy, I sure don't see the attraction Clinton has for some people. She is a carpetbagger pure and simple, and speaking of being simple, she is the prize example.

Oh, she's sly and underhanded and vindictive for sure, all top priority's for a president, eh?

What she really is, is a loser! I'm very hopeful that Iowan's see her for this reality and give her a last place finish, along with that goofy husband of hers. Just two scheming chumps trying to get back in the catbird seat at the Whitehouse.

We can well do without either one of them! Let's all help her keep her head down -- forever!

Posted by: surfer-joe | December 31, 2007 6:43 PM | Report abuse

What a lot of vitriol! let's face it -- all, that is ALL, of the Democratic candidates are qualified, interesting, intelligent, caring. And all, yes ALL of the Republicans are pandering and unrealistic about the war, about health care,about education, about corporate greed. so those of you who shout racist about Hillary are being silly. c'mon. and if you say you'll stay home if she gets the Dem nomination you are cutting off your nose to spite your face. We absolutely don't want another Republican for the next 50 years. or forever for that matter. We Dems have to stick together and not be dragged into the backbiting and nastiness of Republicans. we don't want to turn ourselves into Karl Roves. Whoever wins the Dem nomination deserves to be supported by all of us. don't get duped into being as negative, divisive and stupid as the Republicans. go Democrats!!
********************************************

What an uninformed, closed minded, bigot you are. You're all the things you claim to be against. You must hate yourself.

Posted by: eco-pharm | December 31, 2007 6:43 PM | Report abuse

Who better to stump for this career criminal than a disbarred lawyer & impeached President? And with Bill she gets both rolled into one.
Now if she could just get those imprisoned donors to show up.....................

Posted by: eco-pharm | December 31, 2007 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Hillary should be asked about her loving husband, Bill Clinton and his recieving million dollar donations from Dubai Ports and the Saudi Royalty for his Library in Arkansas.
"I did not have sexual realtions with that woman." "I did not inhale"
How many more lies will we be subjected to?
Tell us about Bill sponsoring Nafta and the loss of three million good paying jobs!

Posted by: umt | December 31, 2007 6:38 PM | Report abuse

I also will not be supporting Clinton in the general election, because of the racial stereotypes they used. Years ago, I wrote her a letter to run in NY, that I would be happy to work in her campaign. I phone banked for the campaign.

Her rival was my congressman when I lived on Long Island. Rick Lazio. I also campaigned for Steve Israel who beat the Republican replacement.

I was floored by the attack. I definetely expected that from the Republicans, but not from the Clintons of all people. Our first...ahem "Black President"

As to Edwards he also is doing the, "wink wink, nudge nudge, I am the southern white boy strategy. Though not as obvious as the Clinton attack. It politics and it is hardball, so I'll let Edwards message go, since it was actually expected. This is America....The place Edwards calls TWO Americas. LOL the irony.

Unfortunately, he voted for the war and this year I won't settle, like I did with Kerry/Edwards last time. I won't campaign against Edwards or Hillary, but I won't vote or campaign for them either.

So.... I see myself sitting it out this election. There will be no anti war candidate I can really believe in. I currently live in NC so my vote probably won't matter anyway.

For the record I currently have a nephew who just got back from Iraq. Thankfully in good shape. So this issue is very important to me, since I also was against the war from the beginning.

To republicans, while I disagree with McCain, I will say that I don't believe he would have resorted to the Karl Rove tactics and that is saying a lot. He is probably the only Republican I can stomach, because at least when he says something, you can believe it..... As much as I disagree with it.

Posted by: vitana1900 | December 31, 2007 6:33 PM | Report abuse

What a lot of vitriol! let's face it -- all, that is ALL, of the Democratic candidates are qualified, interesting, intelligent, caring. And all, yes ALL of the Republicans are pandering and unrealistic about the war, about health care,about education, about corporate greed. so those of you who shout racist about Hillary are being silly. c'mon. and if you say you'll stay home if she gets the Dem nomination you are cutting off your nose to spite your face. We absolutely don't want another Republican for the next 50 years. or forever for that matter. We Dems have to stick together and not be dragged into the backbiting and nastiness of Republicans. we don't want to turn ourselves into Karl Roves. Whoever wins the Dem nomination deserves to be supported by all of us. don't get duped into being as negative, divisive and stupid as the Republicans. go Democrats!!

Posted by: hagueacademic | December 31, 2007 6:24 PM | Report abuse

I don't know about Iowa but a lot of Florida Republicans feel like the candidates in their party would benefit from a vote in the primary for Hillary. So, they've reregistered (switched party) as Democrats for next month's primary in order to vote for her and will switch back in February.

Posted by: wmboyd | December 31, 2007 6:06 PM | Report abuse

Yes she keeps her head down by criticizing Edwards today on the stump.
Stop spreading the lie that she is above the fray
Without mentioning him by name, Clinton also appeared to mock Edwards's fired-up speaking style.

"It's not something you have to do by yelling and screaming. Save your energy. Get the job done," she said about battling special interests. "Instead of generating a lot of heat, rolling your hands and jumping up and down, sit down and figure out how we're going to beat them."

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iNxTApa2sQRu0Xx99P3jt2bEXw7gD8TSMUHO0

Who do you think she was talking about? Americans are not stupid. Stop trying to frame the campaign.

Posted by: TennGurl | December 31, 2007 6:00 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton simply cannot trust herself being caught in another lie. That is why she is MIA. It is now to close to the actual caucus and if she slipped, showing her strongly Progressive, Socialist agenda, she would surely loose. She actually is worse than Bill when it comes to Honesty... "I never had sexual relations with that woman..." The House of Clinton needs to end NOW.

Posted by: stephen.m.kessler | December 31, 2007 5:59 PM | Report abuse

It is time to say Clintons Good Bye. America has seen enough dynasties. GW Bush is not HW Bush and HR Clinton is not W Clinton.

Posted by: khctamu | December 31, 2007 5:56 PM | Report abuse

Obama has trouble with stump speeches. His mouth is engaged before his brain. He does a lot of sputtering and stammering. Can you imagine the trouble he would have making a decision?

HRC/WJC the only way to go!

Posted by: mortified469 | December 31, 2007 5:48 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is going to have to open her mouth at some point....I think her campaign is realizing that there is a direct correlation between her mouth yapping and her negative numbers rising.... Hillary and Bubba need to just go away back to their trailer park in Arkansas.

Posted by: charko825 | December 31, 2007 5:26 PM | Report abuse

Dems are SOOOOOO stupid if Hillary is nominated.

Hillary is the least electable of the bunch. In this angus-reid poll out today, the only republican Hillary can beat is ROMNEY.


http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/29506/obama_leads_five_republicans_in_us_race


It doesn't matter how many Dems like the Clintons, if regular Americans don't like them, the Clintons won't win in 2008.

Posted by: julieds | December 31, 2007 5:23 PM | Report abuse

HRC go and get them tiger. You are finishing in just the most dignified and intelligent way. Cook

Posted by: Cook1 | December 31, 2007 4:57 PM | Report abuse

Clinton has lost my vote due to her pitiful strategy of using racist undertones to sway voters from Obama. I still like all three Democratic candidates, but i will not vote for her in the general election. She lost a large section of the black electorate by that sad move...and she doesn't even know it yet. For shame, now i'll have to sit out of the general election if Edwards or Obama doesn't make it.

Posted by: dranfu | December 31, 2007 4:43 PM | Report abuse

Clinton is going to win this. I can feel it in my bones. Not very scientific but for that I turn to the fundamentals of all the national polls. On all the key attribute questions like experience and electability, or the policy questions like ability to manage Iraq/the economy/healthcare, Clinton wins not just narrowly but by a mile. Then there are the polls of the past few days in IA itself. Clinton is steady while Obama and Edwards are jumping around perhaps indicating the softness of their support. And given the Obama tactics of the last few days one has to assume they are getting nervous about the outcome.

Posted by: johnbsmrk | December 31, 2007 4:39 PM | Report abuse

Wow! The Drive-By Media wonders why the Drive-By Media is leaving Bill's wife alone.

Do ya think it's the Drive-By Media?

Nah, the Drive-By Media helping a candidate by ignoring that candidate - that can't be.....

Posted by: PerryM1 | December 31, 2007 4:35 PM | Report abuse

to esles2000, ednyo2000, so this campaign of Obama IS a racial thing. Glad you said so. Oprah tried to pit black against white but that never reached the press. Obama is about as black as a bowl of vanilla ice cream. Clinton did more for blacks than any other president except Lyndon Johnson.

Posted by: drk797 | December 31, 2007 4:19 PM | Report abuse

There are but three viable candidates for the Dem nomination and they are: Clinton, Biden, and Dodd. The U.S. would be none the worse off if either of these three were inaugerated in Jan. 2009.

Obama is not ready. He will be a shoe-in in 2016 and will serve as many terms as permissible.

Bill Richardson should go home and be the best governor he can be.

Posted by: LarryHighPointNC | December 31, 2007 4:15 PM | Report abuse

Do you believe a win in Iowa for Sen. Hillary Clinton would guarantee her the Democratic Presidential Nomination?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1413

.

Posted by: PollM | December 31, 2007 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Barack Obama for President.

It's time for America to Rise and Shine again.

Posted by: PulSamsara | December 31, 2007 4:07 PM | Report abuse

With the Iowa caucuses rapidly approaching the candidates are pressing their main messages with renewed intensity. The key to campaigning appears to be to "stay on message" regardless of the chaos around you. I am not sure how substantive it is to have a candidate repeat the same slogan over and over, to our political discourse, but this seems to be the conventional wisdom. The daily mantra for Hillary Clinton is "strength and experience". The ex-First Lady cites her experience as a major difference between her and her opponents and one worthy of giving her the nomination. Something about her being able to "hit the ground" running, to where we aren't quite sure. The experience that Ms. Clinton is touting is not just her experience as a junior Senator from New York, given that her closest two rivals also share that experience, no it is her experience in the White House as First Lady.

I for one believe that her experience as First Lady is not necessarily transferable to the position she is now vying for, no more than I believe that First Lady Laura Bush is qualified to be President based on her experiences in the White House. For some reason in this country it is assumed and accepted by many that political positions are hereditary and therefore subject to transfer between fathers and sons, husbands and wives, or brothers. I have often found the reasoning for this strange and not very convincing. I think that many times history has borne out the fact that this idea of transference is not a reliable method of picking our leaders.

The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie -- deliberate, contrived and dishonest -- but the myth -- persistent, persuasive and unrealistic - John F. Kennedy

The Disputed Truth

Posted by: jhawk10 | December 31, 2007 3:51 PM | Report abuse

bill clinton can go to hell, iowa and stay there as far as i'm concerned. you and your bride blew it with me, a lifelong democrat, with your racist whispers about barack obama. how sad and stupid for bill that he'd squander the good will black folks have for him 'cause he's trying to shove his wife down our throats. no thanks, bill. and no thanks, hill!

Posted by: esles2000 | December 31, 2007 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Ha! Good story, and very true. Hillary is staying on message, and making a point to visit every corner of the state. Post 9/11, HRC is the only candidate I trust to lead this country back to international respect, fiscal responsibility, and a new Iraq policy. Go Girl!
Clinton/Bayh 2008

Posted by: aboyzboi | December 31, 2007 3:22 PM | Report abuse

Just saw Obama's financials. Seems odd that he has miminal assets except a $1.9M house that he recently purchased. Don't expect our President to be rich but also don't want him worrying about paying his bills.

Posted by: jcfbiggs | December 31, 2007 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Bill "likes all the candidates, he said, but Iowans have to decide which of them they think would make the best president"
Who is he kidding? he's been to the gutter and back trying to bring down Obama. His wife's campaign should serve as a painful lesson for the black electorate: You're either with us or we'll slur your only hope in the race.However, after trashing Obama, we'll get back to pandering you for your vote and you'll have no choice but to vote for Hillary.Brilliant.
This time around, blacks should teach the democratic party's big wigs a lesson of their own:We sit our behinds home if HRC or JE gets nominated.And you'll get your chosen candidate's behind whipped by the republicans, again. Take that, racist pigs?

Posted by: ednyo2000 | December 31, 2007 2:27 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company