Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

A Campaign for the Ages

By Dan Balz
An e-mail arrived Tuesday morning from Ohio. "Just amazin'," read the subject line. The rest of the message said simply, "Never seen anything like this."

The message came from a political junkie in the Buckeye State who has not taken sides in the Democratic race but who admires a good campaign as much as anyone -- and this one has been extraordinary.

The polls opened Tuesday in Ohio, Texas, Rhode Island and Vermont with as much expectation and uncertainty as on any day since the Iowa caucuses in January -- and potentially the most consequential of any primary or caucus day this year. As New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said the other day, Tuesday is D-Day for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, with the pressure mostly on Clinton.

Measured by the results since Super Tuesday, this is Obama's race to lose. After 11 straight victories, his campaign looks to Tuesday to close out the race. But measured by atmospherics of the last few days, this may be Clinton campaign's to win, with both Texas and Ohio considered close enough that they might tip in her direction.

That both campaigns were equally nervous as the voting began Tuesday spoke to the astonishing performances of both candidates over the most grueling terrain imaginable, two months of a race that has stretched both to the limits. The polling in Ohio and Texas also shows a Democratic electorate that admires both candidates, but that is still sharply divided along economic and demographic lines over whom they want to run against John McCain in November.

Clinton has dominated the final days of the campaigns in Texas and Ohio. Her ringing phone ad in Texas put a sharper focus on the issue of presidential readiness. Her grittiness in Ohio has kept her hopes alive there. In daily conference calls, her spokesmen have raised repeated questions about Obama's ties to indicted contributor Tony Rezko and about what his chief economic adviser may have told the Canadians about NAFTA.

Obama and his advisers have been knocked back on their heels, charging Clinton with employing a "kitchen-sink" strategy of throwing everything possible at the Illinois senator in the hope that something would stick with the voters. Obama's press conference performance in San Antonio Monday, richly described by my colleague Dana Milbank in Tuesday's Post, allowed the Clinton campaign another opportunity Tuesday morning to keep hammering away.

Was all this the last gasp of a Clinton campaign on the brink of elimination or a sign of what is to come if she manages to survive Tuesday's voting? Campaign communications director Howard Wolfson said the Clinton team is bullish about its prospects and confident that she will be in a position Wednesday to keep the campaign going forward. But the Obama campaign is prepared to press its case, with delegate math and endorsements from more superdelegates, that any bullishness from Clinton is manufactured.

The spin wars began days ago. Obama's advisers have, correctly, pointed out that Clinton will remain in a deficit position on the all-important delegate count, almost no matter how Tuesday's results turn out. They are ready to press their claim to the nomination on the basis that she can never overtake Obama.

But a pair of Clinton victories Tuesday -- or perhaps one big victory -- will give the New York senator's team the opportunity to argue that the race is far from over. Gov. Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania, a Clinton supporter, already has predicted that, if the race is still going after Tuesday, Clinton will win his state decisively on April 22.

"Meet me in Pennsylvania" will become the new battle cry for the Clinton campaign, just as "Meet me in Ohio" was slapped on placards and T-shirts as a rallying cry there over the past 10 days.

The campaigns have left nothing on the table in this final week. Obama has poured his superior resources into a barrage of television commercials in Ohio and Texas. He has tapped his enormous networks of volunteers in both states to mobilize and turn out his voters. The candidate has not wilted in the face of Clinton's attacks.

Clinton has worked hours that would sap the energy of a candidate 15 years her junior -- working the night shift and then the early shift on just a few hours' sleep. As in New Hampshire, when even her own advisers thought she was going to lose, Clinton has doggedly refused to accept the early obituaries of her candidacy. "I'm just getting warmed up," she told reporters on Monday.

Which is why political aficionados stand in awe of the two candidates and revel in the vibrancy of their competition. Those who know politics best -- as the message from Ohio Tuesday showed -- cannot get enough of this campaign. Whether it ends after Tuesday or continues on, it has been one for the ages.

By Web Politics Editor  |  March 4, 2008; 3:01 PM ET
Categories:  Dan Balz's Take , Primaries , The Democrats  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama's Words of Caution
Next: No Regrets From Obama


Had Barack Obama lost 12 primary contests in a row, he would have faded into the background--PRONTO. Hillary is given chance after chance to redefine what constitutes "a win." Why is she given such consideration and then able to twist it into media favoritism of Obama? The Democratic Party is being shredded to pieces as we speak. It is almost too late to salvage it.

Hummmm...."If Obama doesn't win the next four contests on March 4, we have broken his momentum," to paraphrase the latest Clinton mantra.

OOOOOPPPPS. The lasted Clinton mantra is, "Meet me in Indiana."

By then, in early May, John McCain won't be the presumptive Republican nominee...he will be the presumptive Republican president.

When are the Democats going to get their collective heads out of their asses? I am appalled they are handing the presidency to John McCain.

Get some huevos and tell Clinton to BOW OUT!

Posted by: RJ_Kruger | March 4, 2008 10:35 PM | Report abuse

The way the media has turned on Obama in the last couple days has been ridiculous. Regardless of the outcome tonight, I hope every journalist takes a good, hard, look in the mirror tomorrow morning.

This goes double for the general, whoever our nominee is. Hope McCain's summer camp in Sedona didn't have any effect on you guys.

Posted by: Nissl | March 4, 2008 7:43 PM | Report abuse

Throwing innuendo-based accusations around, and getting them played on television by complaining of media bias -- nothing like the sweet taste of gutter politics in the morning. If you'd like to see four more years of gratuitous and hateful mud-slinging, vote Clinton.

Posted by: davestickler | March 4, 2008 5:52 PM | Report abuse

Sadly, it looks as if the Clintons' dirty kitchen-sinking of Obama is working--the equivalent of swiftboating of Kerry. And the media has gone on the tear against Obama in the last two days just so the political circus that is bringing them big bucks will keep going. This includes Jon Stewart and SNL, who worked hard to give Hillary the edge today. So much for the health of our beloved republic, for the good of the party and the nation. We common citizens will be ravaged by eight more years of tear-us-all-down to kingdom come. How many more cigars and stained blue dresses will we be watching when Hillary is woken up at 3 a.m. on account of First Laddie? All this Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton dynastic misrule makes us weep.

Posted by: shirleylim | March 4, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

It's the last desperate lashing out of a women scorned. Sad.

Posted by: thebobbob | March 4, 2008 4:39 PM | Report abuse

Balz asks: "Was all this the last gasp of a Clinton campaign on the brink of elimination or a sign of what is to come if she manages to survive Tuesday's voting?"

...or is it the beginning of the end of the Obama campaign as it collapses under its own weight for the electorate suddenly realizing we don't know anything about him?

Posted by: zukermand | March 4, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

While those "political aficionados stand in awe of the two candidates and revel in the vibrancy of their competition", all I can think about is that both candidates have made false and misleading and incomplete statements, putting forth policy proposals that would be massive failures.

While Dan Balz is admiring their campaigns, he might want to give at least a little thought to whether he and his paper are doing a public service, or whether they're doing a public disservice by refusing to discuss the flaws in the candidates' policies.

Instead of things like this, how about printing out one of the questions here, and just reading it to a candidate?

Posted by: LonewackoDotCom | March 4, 2008 4:10 PM | Report abuse

It is obvious that the Clintons whining about Obama coverage has worked on the media. 48 hours before Obama can put Hillary away all of "kitchen sink" comes from the Clintons through the media. The media loves this horse race and will do whatever it can to help facilitate or manipulate a brokered convention in Denver.

The media is setting the Democrats up for failure. If the Democrats nominate Hillary Clinton they will lose in November. She will not have a solid coalition including the Independent vote, the Black vote,the youth vote or the white male vote. If the fight goes on with the Clinton Attack Machine by the time Obama gets the nomination it will be worthless which is what I think the Clintons are banking on.

Posted by: unteal | March 4, 2008 4:05 PM | Report abuse

"Those who know politics best -- as the message from Ohio Tuesday showed -- cannot get enough of this campaign" - which is why the media appears to be doing everything it can to prevent an Obama victory. I've never seen such slanted coverage, though I think the Washington Post is among the only exceptions. Why not let Mark Penn anchor the Situation Room and make Howard Wolfson Editor of the New York Times?

Posted by: Republicus1 | March 4, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Looks like Obama's to win, as the Internet Indicators have been showing for him all along;

Barack vs Hillary Analysis-
the Google Effect:

Posted by: davidmwe | March 4, 2008 3:12 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company