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.

Manchester - Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton comes into the state this weekend riding atop a new American Research Group Inc. poll showing her with a 20-point lead over her closest rival, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama.

The same poll in July showed the two candidates in a dead heat at 31 percent apiece.

On the Republican side, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has opened a lead over former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani -- 27 to 23 percent -- with Arizona Sen. John McCain favored by 12 percent and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee at 9 percent. In July, Giuliani held a slight lead over Romney, 27 to 26 percent.

The poll done this week of the Democrats shows Clinton favored by 37 percent of the likely primary voters, while Obama has 17 percent and former vice presidential candidate John Edwards has 14 percent, the same as last month. The remaining Democratic candidates are in single digits, while 16 percent remain undecided.

The poll sampled 600 likely voters -- 430 registered Democrats and 170 undeclared -- between Aug. 26 and 29 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percent.

Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, will appear at rallies Sunday in Concord at the State House at 1 p.m. and in Portsmouth in Market Square at 6 p.m. Obama will appear Monday at a Labor Day Rally in Manchester in Veterans Memorial Park at 10 a.m. and at Milford and Hudson. New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd will be in New Hampshire this weekend as well.

ARG polls done in Iowa show Clinton with a 28 to 23 percent lead over Obama, with Edwards at 20 percent, and in North Carolina Clinton has 32 percent, with Edwards at 24 percent and Obama at 21 percent.

In New Hampshire, this week's poll of the Republican candidates show unannounced candidates Fred Thompson with 8 percent and Newt Gingrich with 4 percent and no one else above 2 percent, while 13 percent are undecided. The poll sampled 600 likely voters - 410 registered Republicans and 190 undeclared - between Aug. 26 and 29 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percent. The ARG polls showed Romney with a lead in Iowa with Giuliani second and Huckabee third, and in North Carolina, Giuliani with 26 percent, Thompson with 21 percent, McCain at 12 percent, and Romney and Huckabee with 9 percent.

By Garry Rayno, New Hampshire Union Leader, August 31, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton could carry the Empire State in 2008, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. 55 per cent of respondents would support the New York senator in the next United States presidential election.

Republican former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani is second with 33 per cent. In addition, seven per cent of respondents would vote for another candidate, and two per cent remain undecided.

Rodham Clinton-a former first lady-has served in the U.S. Senate since 2001. In November 2006, she earned a new six-year term in the upper house, defeating former Yonkers mayor John Spencer with 67 per cent of all cast ballots.

Giuliani served as New York City's head of government from 1994 to 2001. He garnered national and international attention in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. In 2000, Giuliani withdrew from a campaign to the U.S. Senate-where he would have faced Rodham Clinton-after being diagnosed with prostate cancer.

In 2004, Democratic nominee John Kerry carried New York's 31 electoral votes, with 58 per cent of the vote. No Republican has won the Empire State since Ronald Reagan in 1984.

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, August 30, 2007

Asked why Clinton didn't get the union's support, spokesman Monte Byers said: "We don't have anything against Senator Clinton, but we are concerned that she's surrounded by the same economic advisers who created NAFTA," the North American Free Trade Agreement opposed by labor.

Clinton's endorsement from the Machinists was her second major union backing this week. She secured the endorsement of the 125,000-member United Transportation Union on Tuesday. Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd earned a major boost to his candidacy, winning the backing of the 281,000-member International Association of Fire Fighters.

The Machinists union has 700,000 members and estimates a third of the membership votes Republican. It is the first time the union has done a dual endorsement. It chose to do so this year to encourage all members to participate in the election.

Clinton, a New York senator and former first lady, beat out Edwards and Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich for the endorsement. The union only considered candidates who appeared before members during its conference this week at the Walt Disney World Resort.

"Hillary Clinton earned the IAM's endorsement by focusing on jobs, health care, education and trade - the bread and butter issues of the American middle class," union President Tom Buffenbarger said in a news release. "She is the only candidate of either party to come forward with a comprehensive manufacturing policy."

Clinton said in a statement she was honored to received the union's endorsement. "It is time for America's working families to again share in our nation's prosperity," Clinton said. "They will not be invisible to my administration."

Huckabee, a former Arkansas governor, was the lone Republican to address the conference. Mike Huckabee was the only Republican candidate with the guts to meet with our members and the only one willing to figure out where and how we might work together," said Buffenbarger. "He is entitled to serious consideration from our members voting in the upcoming Republican primaries."

Byers said the union was planning to kick off its support with a membership rally in New Hampshire on Sept. 8. He said the union has not made an endorsement in a presidential primary for many years.

The carpenters' union is one of the top 100 overall political donors nationwide, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. It has given more than $17.5 million to federal candidates since 1989, with 93 percent going to Democrats and has more than 46,000 members in six states that are likely to hold early voting. Edwards said in a statement: "If we're going to grow the middle class and ensure fairness, we need to strengthen workers' rights." The International Association of Firefighters pledged thousands of boots on the ground to support Dodd's campaign, saying that their backing can make the differences in a state like Iowa where organization is key to a candidate's success. Though there are 1,570 IAF members in the state, their leaders said the union's impact would be magnified far beyond that number. The firefighters union launched a three-day tour to tout the move in key early states, beginning with Iowa. Union President Harold Schaitberger promised a repeat of the union's success in helping resurrect the Iowa campaign of John Kerry, who came from behind to win the Democratic nomination in 2004.

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Hillary Rodham Clinton keeps a large advantage in the national race for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination in the United States, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. 40 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in a 2008 primary.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 21 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 17 per cent, New Mexico governor Bill Richardson with five per cent, and Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich with three per cent.

On Aug. 27, Edwards questioned Rodham Clinton's relationship with interest groups, saying, "My lesson is not the same as hers. Her lesson is: give them a seat the table. I think if you give the drug companies, insurance companies and their lobbyists a seat at the table, they'll eat all the food." The New York senator dismissed Edwards' criticism, declaring, "My record shows I've been very effective. (...) I believe in working with everybody and being influenced by nobody."

In American elections, candidates require 270 votes in the Electoral College to win the White House. In November 2004, Republican George W. Bush earned a second term after securing 286 electoral votes from 31 states. Democratic nominee John Kerry received 252 electoral votes from 19 states and the District of Columbia.

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

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton would carry the Golden State in the 2008 United States presidential election, according to a poll by SurveyUSA released by KABC-TV. At least 56 per cent of respondents in California would vote for the New York senator in head-to-head contests against three prospective Republican candidates.

Rodham Clinton holds a 17-point lead over former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, a 25-point advantage over actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson, and a 28-point lead over former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.

In 2004, Democrat John Kerry carried the Golden State's 55 electoral votes, with 55 per cent of all cast ballots. The last Republican to win California in a presidential election was George H. Bush in 1988.

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton holds the upper hand in Missouri, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. At least 46 per cent of respondents in the Show Me State would vote for the New York senator in head-to-head United States presidential contests against four prospective Republican candidates.

Rodham Clinton holds a three-point edge over former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, a six-point lead over both actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson and Arizona senator John McCain, and a nine-point advantage over former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.

In 2004, Republican George W. Bush carried Missouri's 11 electoral votes, with 53 per cent of all cast ballots. Aside from the 1956 presidential election, the Show Me State has picked the eventual winner in every contest since 1900.

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - A majority of voters in the Evergreen State would support Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton in the 2008 United States presidential election, according to a poll by SurveyUSA released by KING-TV. At least 55 per cent of respondents in Washington would back the New York senator in head-to-head contests against three prospective Republican candidates.

Rodham Clinton holds a 15-point lead over former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, a 19-point advantage over actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson, and a 21-point lead over former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.

In 2004, Democrat John Kerry won Washington's 11 electoral votes, with 53 per cent of the vote. The last Republican to carry the Evergreen State in a U.S. presidential election was Ronald Reagan in 1984.

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

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Many adults in Oregon would vote for Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton in the 2008 United States presidential election, according to a poll by SurveyUSA released by KATU-TV. At least 52 per cent of respondents would back the New York senator in head-to-head contests against three prospective Republican candidates.

Rodham Clinton holds a 10-point lead over former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, a 12-point advantage over actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson, and a 20-point lead over former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.

In 2004, Democrat John Kerry won Oregon's seven electoral votes, with 51 per cent of the vote. The last Republican to carry the Beaver State in a U.S. presidential election was Ronald Reagan in 1984.

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

In a race between two New York politicians, New York voters stay with the party line and prefer Hillary Clinton over Rudy Giuliani by a twenty-five point margin, 58% to 33%.

Clinton has consistently led all Democrats in the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll. Giuliani has held a less comfortable lead on the Republican side.

Thirty-eight percent (38%) name the War on Terror as the top issue of Election 2008 while 23% name the economy. Democrats are evenly divided between the two while Republicans overwhelmingly see the War on Terror as more important.

New York voters narrowly prefer Clinton over Giuliani when it comes to handling the War on Terror, but unaffiliated voters are a bit more comfortable with Giuliani.

On state issues, just 25% say that state and local political leaders are doing a good or excellent job with the state's bridges and infrastructure issues.

In Primary Polls, Clinton leads all Democrats in New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Florida.

The Republican Primary picture is more muddled. Romney leads in New Hampshire, Thompson leads in South Carolina, and Giuliani is on top in Florida.

This telephone survey of 500 Likely New York Voters was conducted by Rasmussen Reports in patnership with FOX Television Stations, Inc. on August 22-23, 2007. The margin of sampling error for the survey is +/- 4.5 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton leads three prospective Republican rivals in Iowa, according to a poll by SurveyUSA released by KAAL-TV. At least 51 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in head-to-head 2008 United States presidential contests.

Rodham Clinton holds a 12-point lead over former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, a 13-point advantage over actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson, and an nine-point lead over former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.

In 2004, Republican George W. Bush carried Iowa's seven electoral votes, with 50 per cent of all cast ballots. No GOP nominee had carried the Hawkeye State since Ronald Reagan in 1984.

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton holds a slight edge over Republican Rudy Giuliani in Pennsylvania, according to a poll by the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. 46 per cent of respondents in the Keystone State would vote for the New York senator in the 2008 United States presidential election, while 44 per cent would back the former New York City mayor.

Giuliani also holds a five-point advantage over Illinois senator Barack Obama, and a two-point edge over former North Carolina senator John Edwards.

In other match-ups, Arizona senator John McCain trails Rodham Clinton by six points, Obama by three points, and Edwards by eight points. The three Democratic presidential hopefuls hold double-digit leads over actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson, and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.

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) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton leads three prospective Republican rivals in the North Star State, according to a poll by SurveyUSA released by KSTP-TV. At least 47 per cent of respondents in Minnesota would vote for the New York senator in head-to-head 2008 United States presidential contests.

Rodham Clinton holds a three-point edge over former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, a nine-point advantage over actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson, and a 16-point lead over former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.

In 2004, Democrat John Kerry carried Minnesota's 10 electoral votes, with 51 per cent of all cast ballots. The last Republican to win the North Star State in a presidential election was Richard Nixon in 1972.

Two larger-than-life politicians, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Ronald Reagan, charged into the California governor's office with the help of young voters, many of whom were drawn to the Republican Party by a message of sunny optimism. But what those two very different Republican politicians did to attract millions of young adults looks to be a feat the Grand Old Party may not repeat anytime soon - either in California or on the national level in the 2008 presidential election.

A Democracy Corps poll from the Washington firm of Greenberg Quinlan Rosner suggests voters ages 18 to 29 have undergone a striking political evolution in recent years. Young Americans have become so profoundly alienated from Republican ideals on issues including the war in Iraq, global warming, same-sex marriage and illegal immigration that their defections suggest a political setback that could haunt Republicans "for many generations to come," the poll said.

The startling collapse of GOP support among young voters is reflected in the poll's findings that show two-thirds of young voters surveyed believe Democrats do a better job than Republicans of representing their views - even on issues Republicans once owned, such as terrorism and taxes.

And among GOP presidential candidates, only former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani registers with more positive views than negative with young voters, the poll shows.

The anti-GOP shift for this generation - which is expected to reach 50 million voters, or 17 percent of the electorate, in 2008 - represents a marked contrast from their predecessors, the Gen Xers born in the mid-'60s to mid-'70s whose demographic represented the strongest Republican voters in the nation, pollster Anna Greenberg said. Today, "on every single issue, Democrats are doing better with young people - no matter what the issue is," said Greenberg.

Catherine Brinkman, 28, of Foster City, who heads the California Young Republicans, said she hears from many of her Republican friends who say, " 'Look at our (presidential) candidates compared to the Democrats: They have Hillary, everyone knows her ... and you have this phenomenal (senator) out of Chicago, who is African American and energized.' " The perception is that "we're still selling the same old white guys," Brinkman said.

The problem for the Republicans with young voters may be especially potent in California, where political veterans say the widening gulf between Schwarzenegger and the increasingly conservative tilt of Republican elected officials threatens a party that already has found it difficult to win statewide for the past 15 years. "I think you have to be concerned when you have some (Republican) people who are saying that global warming is a hoax and that status quo for health care is acceptable," said Adam Mendelsohn, the communications director for Schwarzenegger. "These are all positions that don't reflect where Republicans are in this state - and this is especially true when you start looking at young Republicans."

Schwarzenegger, by supporting issues "once owned by the Democrats," such as the environment and education, has lured many young voters to support him and "closely identify themselves as Schwarzenegger Republicans," Mendelsohn said. But Democratic strategist Garry South said Schwarzenegger's success at the polls won't translate to other Republican candidates. South pointed toward the recent state budget battle, which pitted Schwarzenegger and Democratic legislators against conservative GOP senators who delayed the $145 billion budget for almost two months to pressure for more cuts and protections for businesses against environmental lawsuits. The demands of the state senators, South said, were so far to the right of the average voter that "the Republican brand in California now is so tainted and toxic that the only way you're going to win is to buy yourself out of the brand." That means wealthy GOP candidates such as Schwarzenegger or Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner must dip into their considerable bank accounts to "spend millions and tell voters why you're different. But if not - you will go down like lambs to the slaughter," South said.

In California, the GOP's relatively weak prospects in the presidential election and in future statewide elections can be traced to what has been an increasingly tone deaf approach to a new set of priorities among voters, particularly the young, said Cal State Sacramento political communications Professor Barbara O'Connor. "The fact that the governor's rating is around 60 percent is indicative of the legacy solutions that he proposes are resonating with the voters," including health care, infrastructure issues and education, O'Connor said. "When a bridge is collapsing, the levees are in danger of flooding, or they're sitting in gridlock ... people don't care about, 'I saved you this much money,' " O'Connor said of the traditional Republican effort to cut the budget. "They care when their life is better. Parties should try to fix things - or ignore them at their peril."

Greenberg said the poll showed the war in Iraq and President Bush are unpopular with younger voters, which contributed to the decline in support for the GOP.

Younger voters, who grew up in the Clinton years, are also increasingly at odds with the GOP and its leaders on social issues. "This is a more diverse generation, racially and ethnically, and it's more progressive on social issues like gay marriage," Greenberg said. "They see the Republican Party as profoundly different on tolerance and identity."

The poll also suggests the GOP is not addressing young voters' deep concerns about their future economic security. "Young people's economic struggles, more than any other issue, defines their political agenda," she said.

The study released last month of 1,017 voters ages 18-29 was conducted May 29-June 19. Voters were reached by a random telephone survey, through the Internet and on cell phones. The poll did not disclose a margin of error.

Greenberg Quinlan Rosner is a polling firm generally affiliated with Democrats. Its founder, Stan Greenberg, was a pollster for Democratic President Bill Clinton.

The GOP's problems for the future that show up in the poll are evident among young conservatives such as Wes Hanson, 17, a Livermore High School senior who describes himself as church-going, strongly anti-abortion and deeply concerned with the impacts of illegal immigration. But Hanson, who will cast his first presidential ballot in the 2008 election, is not sure he will register Republican - and is just as likely to be a "decline-to-state" or independent voter. "I feel that Republicans tend to look out more for the best interests of the majority," especially on fiscal issues and moral responsibility, Hanson says. But, like many in his age group, he has a libertarian streak and believes party lawmakers are wrong to try to legislate issues such as same-sex marriage. "I don't think it's any of the government's business," said Hanson, who says he is still not inspired by any of the GOP's 2008 presidential candidates.

Paul Lindsay, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee, acknowledged the challenges that the Iraq war and other issues have created for the party, but said they are not insurmountable. "Obviously, this is a tough political environment for our party, but we believe our brand of individual responsibility, lower taxes and national security is one that resonates with youth voters," he said

The Democratic National Committee sought to seize control of its unraveling nominating process yesterday, rejecting pleas from state party leaders and cracking down on Florida for scheduling a Jan. 29 presidential primary.

The DNC's rules and bylaws committee, which enforces party rules, voted yesterday morning to strip Florida of all its delegates to the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver -- the harshest penalty at its disposal. The penalty will not take effect for 30 days, and rules committee members urged officials from the nation's fourth-most-populous state to use the time to schedule a later statewide caucus and thus regain its delegates.

By making an object lesson of Florida, Democrats hope to squelch other states' efforts to move their voting earlier, which have created chaos in the primary structure that the national party has established. But the decision to sanction such a pivotal, vote-rich state has risks. The party punished Delaware in 1996 for similar rules violations. But Florida, a mega-state that has played a pivotal role in the past two presidential elections, is different. The clash leaves the presidential candidates in limbo about how to campaign there.

Asked what Hillary Rodham Clinton's plans are for the state, Harold Ickes, a DNC member and adviser to the New York senator, said, "I don't think anyone's going to answer that question, or cross that bridge, until we see what happens in the next 30 days." Bill Burton, a spokesman for Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), said, "Hopefully, in the next 30 days, Florida and the DNC can reach agreement so Florida's delegates can contribute to the nomination contest."

Florida's state party chair, Karen L. Thurman, showed no signs of backing down yesterday. The former congresswoman said she will consult with state Democrats but added that she expects all the presidential candidates to ignore the national party's edict and campaign vigorously in advance of the Sunshine State's primary. "Whether you get a delegate or don't get a delegate, a vote is a vote," a defiant Thurman said. "That is what Floridians are going to say is important."

The DNC rules stipulate that states that have not been granted a special waiver must schedule presidential nominating contests after Feb. 5. "Rules are rules," said DNC member Garry S. Shays, of California, at the meeting. "California abided by them, and Florida should, as well. To ignore them would open the door to chaos." Donna Brazile, a member of the rules committee who argued for a swift and harsh punishment for Florida, said states' desire to be more relevant in the nominating process does not excuse violations of rules intended to make the system fair for everyone.

I understand how states crave to be first. I understand that they're envious of the role that Iowa and New Hampshire have traditionally played," said Brazile, who was Al Gore's campaign manager in 2000. "The truth is, we had a process. . . . We're going to back these rules."

Though the DNC's action was well-telegraphed, it came after emotional pleas from state party leaders, who blamed the initial selection of the date on Republicans who control the legislature. Thurman said she and her staff spent "countless hours" trying to persuade the legislature to pick another date. Jon Ausman, a DNC member from Florida, begged his colleagues to make an exception for Florida because of those efforts. "We're asking you for mercy, not judgment," Ausman said. The rules committee was largely unmoved; only one member -- Florida's Allan Katz -- voted against imposing the sanctions.

Under the caucus alternative proposed yesterday, voters could still go to the polls on Jan. 29 to express their preferences for a presidential nominee, but the results would be ceremonial, much like the results of the Republican straw poll held in Ames, Iowa, this month. "It's essentially a beauty contest. . . . There are no delegates now," said Alexis Herman, co-chair of the rules committee.

Thurman and other state leaders said there are several problems with the caucus suggestion. She said a caucus could cost the state party as much as $8 million -- money she said the party and its benefactors do not have. She said a caucus in a state the size of Florida would be impractical and would have the effect of allowing far fewer people to participate. State party officials also said they prefer to keep the official voting on Jan. 29 because a property tax initiative they hope to defeat will be on the ballot that day. Turning the Democratic presidential primary into a meaningless event would probably mean lower turnout among the party's faithful and make it harder to defeat the initiative, they said. "Defeating a horrible referendum on Jan. 29 . . . is a top priority for every constituent group I am aware of," said Terrie Brady, a DNC member and former chair of the Florida state party.

Thurman declined to say whether she or state officials are likely to file a lawsuit against the national party, as was suggested by Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) during a conference call Friday. "Yeah, this is emotional for me, and it should be," she said. Asked whether she thought Florida had been treated fairly, she said, "We'll see in 30 days."

Both political parties have struggled over the years to determine how best to nominate their presidential candidates.

Iowa and New Hampshire have dominated that process since the late 1960s, in part by arguing that their relatively small size allows candidates to have more personal contact with voters. But in recent years, larger states and those with more ethnic diversity have argued that they should be at the front of the process, too. This year, those pressures have pushed presidential voting earlier than ever. "I think this whole system is goofy. It's all out of kilter," Ickes said. "I think we start way too early." Alice Germond, a West Virginia member of the DNC, said that "the process is still a mess."

The national parties face the prospect of further confrontations: South Carolina Republicans have moved their primary to Jan. 19, a decision that may force New Hampshire and Iowa to vote earlier in January. And Michigan's legislature is on the verge of approving a Jan. 15 date -- a move that would violate the same Democratic rule that Florida faces punishment for breaking.
The Michigan Republican State Committee voted yesterday to endorse the new date. "Moving up the primary will make Michigan the first major industrial state to hold a presidential primary and will give our voters a chance to educate the next president of the United States about Michigan and its specific issues," state GOP Chairman Saulius "Saul" Anuzis said in a statement.

By Michael D. Shear, The Washington Post, August 26, 2007

"Is it Mrs. President or Madam President?" Simon asked a smiling Clinton.

The Clintons frequently vacationed on Martha's Vineyard during their years in the White House. The senator told the crowd that the family has been vacationing in the island for 14 years.

Bill Clinton told the crowd his wife would make the strongest president among those seeking to succeed Bush in January 2009 because she has the best plans to deal with national security, climate change, health care and education. "If we were not married and Hillary asked me to do this, to be here tonight, I would be here," the former president said.

In her speech, the New York senator blasted the Bush administration on everything from failure to address problems with global warming to education and the economy.

She aimed her sharpest remarks at what she described as the Bush administration's "indifference and incompetence" in dealing with Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath. "It is a national disgrace," said Clinton who is traveling to New Orleans this week to mark the second anniversary of the disaster. "What happened because of Katrina was a turning point in our country."

Clinton also sharply criticized Bush for his handling of the Iraq war, repeating her call for the U.S. to begin withdrawing its troops from the country. "I believe that if he does not extricate us from Iraq by the time he leaves office, that when I am president I will," she said. "I want to be a president who gets back to setting big goals for our country."

The $50-per-ticket event was expected to raise more than $100,000 for the campaign.

By Denisa Lavoie, Associated Press, August 25, 2007

WASHINGTON (AP) - Florida Democrats could lose their votes for the presidential nominee next year unless they change plans to hold their primary earlier than national party rules allow.
The Democratic National Committee's Rules and Bylaws Committee was poised Saturday to vote against Florida's plans for a Jan. 29 primary and to strip the state of delegate votes at the national convention in Denver next year, several party officials said.

With other states rushing to set early nominating contests, Florida offers the first test of the DNC's resolve to restore order to the schedule it set last year. Michigan and New Hampshire also are considering moving up their voting, in violation of the party rules. Several party officials said they want to take a tough stand against Florida and send a message to other states. The shifting dates have added some uncertainty to the presidential candidates' campaign plans with the first votes to be cast in less than five months.

Advisers to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, who has a wide lead in Florida polls, said she will go wherever elections are held. But the DNC has threatened to penalize candidates who campaign in states that violate the rules.

Other candidates are waiting to see how the dispute shakes out. Sen. Barack Obama's schedule had him raising money in Florida on Saturday, but his campaign said the Illinois senator might not return often during the primary season.

Party rules say states cannot hold their 2008 primary contests before Feb. 5, except for Iowa on Jan. 14, Nevada on Jan. 19, New Hampshire on Jan. 22 and South Carolina on Jan. 29. Florida ignored that calendar and passed a law setting its date for Jan. 29. According to the rules, a violation means penalties: The Democratic congressional delegation and DNC members from Florida would lose their votes for the nominee at the Denver convention. Also, the party's Rules and Bylaws Committee would decide whether to strip Florida of anywhere from half to all of its 185 other delegates to the convention.

The state party would have 30 days to change its plan before the sanctions would go into effect. Florida's Democratic lawmakers are pledging to fight back. "We are quite concerned that Florida Democrats are going to lose their right to vote,'' Sen. Bill Nelson told reporters Friday. Recalling the 2000 presidential election controversy in Florida, he added, "And of all states, we have the sensitivity of this because of what we have gone through.''

In 2000, the election between Republican George W. Bush and Democrat Al Gore was held up for a recount in Florida. The Supreme Court stopped the recount, and Bush won the state by 537 votes.

Michigan's Legislature has taken up a bill that would move its contest to Jan. 15, but the state party submitted a proposal that for now describes a caucus on Feb. 9. New Hampshire's secretary of state says he may move up the state's primary, but for now the party has submitted a plan for Jan. 22, with the notation that the date is subject to change.

By Nedra Pickler, Associated Press, August 25, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - More Democratic Party supporters in the United States would like Hillary Rodham Clinton to become their presidential nominee next year, according to a poll by Harris Interactive. 43 per cent of respondents would back the New York senator in a 2008 primary.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 27 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 12 per cent, and former U.S. vice-president Al Gore with 11 per cent. Support is lower for New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, Delaware senator Joe Biden, Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich, retired general Wesley Clark, and Connecticut senator Chris Dodd.

Yesterday, Dodd introduced his plan to protect U.S. home owners affected by a recent mortgage crisis, saying, "Home ownership is the cornerstone of the American dream and essential to the strength of a healthy and vibrant middle class. It will take proven leadership that knows the issue and how to get things done, if we are going to get immediate action to help families threatened with foreclosure in the wake of the sub-prime mess and forge long term solutions to keep home loans affordable."

In American elections, candidates require 270 votes in the Electoral College to win the White House. In November 2004, Republican George W. Bush earned a second term after securing 286 electoral votes from 31 states. Democratic nominee John Kerry received 252 electoral votes from 19 states and the District of Columbia.

TAMA, Iowa -- Sorry, all you political junkies in Florida, New York, California, Michigan and any other state maneuvering to have more say in picking the presidential nominees. Your opinion on the presidential contenders simply matters less than the view of Judy Huff, a retired pharmacy worker from Grinnell, Iowa. Your state leaders may not admit that, but most of the candidates and their political pros know it, and so does the earnest Huff, who makes a point of meeting as many presidential candidates as possible. "Yes, we get sick of all the phone calls from the campaigns, but we take this responsibility very seriously," said Huff, waiting recently to see Republican Mitt Romney in a rural coffee shop. "It's very fun to be able to see so many candidates in person and learn all we can learn first-hand, instead of relying on newspapers and TV to educate us."

For all the mad scrambling by states, including Florida, to snatch early presidential attention from Iowa and New Hampshire, there's no sign yet that Hawkeye or Granite staters are losing influence. Far from it.

"All this front-loading does is magnify the importance of Iowa and New Hampshire -- as long as they're first," said Mark Mellman, the pollster in 2004 for John Kerry, who won the Iowa caucuses and rode that momentum to the nomination. "A win in Iowa creates massive visibility. Historically, half the news coverage of the whole primary comes out of Iowa and New Hampshire."

But this time, the primary calendar is on the verge of imploding as state after state maneuvers to schedule its primary earlier than the next.

On Saturday in Washington, Florida Democrats are bracing for the possibility that the Democratic National Committee will strip the state of all its delegates to the national convention as punishment for scheduling a primary earlier than Feb. 5. Last spring, lawmakers in Tallahassee moved the state's primary date from March to Jan. 29.

Meanwhile, about 20 states have moved their primaries to Feb. 5, which has been dubbed "tsunami Tuesday." South Carolina Republicans moved their primary to Jan. 19. And to complicate matters, Michigan state senators voted on Wednesday to schedule their primary for Jan. 15. Michigan's state House has yet to consider the measure, but if it passes it probably would push Iowa and New Hampshire leaders to set still earlier elections.

"What happens in Iowa and New Hampshire really affects what happens in South Carolina and then Florida," said David Johnson, former executive director of the Florida GOP. "As long as Iowa and New Hampshire are in the front, they're always going to matter because the national media will be there." Virginia-based Republican pollster Jon McHenry said the prospect of Iowa moving its caucuses into December, which it might if more states move earlier into January, could cost Iowa influence. If the caucuses are lost amid the holidays, or if voters and candidates had a long period between the Iowa caucuses and the next contest, momentum from Iowa would diminish. "If they got pushed into going into December it would make it a slightly glorified straw poll," McHenry said.

A longtime pact

Since the mid 1980s, Iowa and New Hampshire have held to a strained bargain where Iowa holds the first caucuses -- basically neighborhood meetings of party activists across the state -- and New Hampshire holds the first primary in the presidential nominating season. Those states don't always pick the ultimate nominee, but they help prove viability and drive momentum. They also typically sink a candidate who performs poorly in both. The value and the weakness of the early state balloting is that Iowa and New Hampshire have small populations. That means Judy Huff can expect to meet the candidates herself, but it also means a relatively small group of voters has a very big say.

Consider: In 2004, about 125,000 Democrats turned out for the hotly contested Iowa caucus that vaulted Kerry into the nomination. Jim Davis got more Democratic votes in his failed bid for governor last year in Hillsborough County alone.

That's why states like Florida and Michigan, with big, diverse populations, have argued that they have a rightful place on the early presidential calendar.

And that's also why allies of former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani and New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton see the front-loading of the 2008 primary calendar as particularly beneficial to them - especially in the case of Florida, where each leads the early polls.

Florida's vote falls just before Feb. 5, which is going to be a virtual national primary day with big states like New Jersey, New York, and California scheduled. Well-financed front-runners benefit most from a system like this.

But even with a loaded up schedule of big states, that doesn't mean Giuliani or anyone can afford poor showings in both Iowa and New Hampshire. "The history of primaries shows that it's very hard to hold onto your base of support if you're losing," Mellman said. "A strategy that counts on holding your base after losing Iowa and New Hampshire is a fatally flawed strategy."

Candidates in the past have bypassed Iowa - John McCain in 2000 and Wesley Clark in 2004 -- and come to regret it. Nobody is risking an overt snub of the state this year. The most important voters of this primary tend to notice those things. "If we're not good enough for them to come to Iowa," said Republican farmer Tom Heinz, 57, "I'm not interested in their candidacy."

By Adam C. Smith, St Petersburg Times, August 24, 2007

PRIMGHAR, Iowa - If Hillary Rodham Clinton wins Iowa's presidential caucuses, it won't be because of endorsements or poll numbers. It will be because of people like Carol McCarty, who lives in the state's heavily Republican northwest corner but plans to attend her local caucus and stand up for Clinton.

In Iowa, it's all about getting people to the caucuses on a cold night this winter.

Identifying supporters like McCarty - and persuading them to show up at the caucuses to choose delegates for each candidate - is the central challenge facing Clinton and her rivals in this important early voting state. Democratic candidates have mounted vast organizational efforts across Iowa, deploying hundreds of staff and volunteers to feed, court and cajole finicky caucus-goers months before a vote is cast. "Our organizers sit down with supporters, go to their homes, go to coffee with them and give them several ways to become involved," said Angelique Pirozzi, who runs Clinton's Iowa field program. "It's fundamentally a program of relationships."

Democratic rivals John Edwards and Barack Obama have also mounted strong operations in Iowa, and polls show a tight race here even as Clinton maintains a lead in national polls.

Much has changed here for Clinton since May, when a memo surfaced from her deputy campaign manager urging her to skip Iowa - "our consistently weakest state," in the memo's words. Since then, the campaign has redoubled its efforts in the state, opening 19 field offices and hiring more than 100 staffers. Supporters are being recruited to chair each of the state's 99 counties and 1,784 precincts. Clinton has stepped up her visits, and the campaign recently began running its first television commercials.

Identifying supporters and persuading them to caucus for a candidate remains a slow and meticulous process for all the campaigns. Democratic campaigns also focus much of their efforts in rural Republican-leaning counties, where even a handful of supporters showing up on caucus night can yield delegates for a candidate. In Primghar, just nine voters showed up for what was billed as the Clinton campaign's O'Brien County kickoff meeting. The group was treated to pizza and presentations by local field organizer Rebecca Slutzky and by Rep. Jay Inslee, who flew to Iowa from his home state of Washington. "I'm here because Iowa's the most important place to be. The rest of the world watches and waits to see who Iowa picks," Slutzky, a Virginia native, told the group. "If you're undecided and you want to hear more, we'll set up a meeting. I'll sit in your living room as long as it takes." To make their pitch, Slutzky and Inslee carefully went through talking points. Attendees listened and asked questions, but by the end most remained uncommitted. Only McCarty promised to attend the caucuses for Clinton.

"This has made my whole trip worthwhile!" Inslee said, asking McCarty if she'd be willing to call her friends and talk up Clinton's candidacy. "I'll speak personally to people. I'm not a great phone person," McCarty replied.

It's equally slow going for Clinton's rivals in Iowa.

Edwards, who placed a close second to John Kerry in the 2004 caucuses, has staked his candidacy on winning Iowa this time. He and his wife, Elizabeth, completed a five-day bus tour of the state last week, making stops in 31 communities. The campaign has opened 15 field offices and is running an extensive outreach program to the state's many rural areas. Edwards' Iowa spokesman, Dan Leistikow, spoke of the importance of "old-fashioned Iowa campaigning" - including canvassing, phone banks and organizational meetings - to identify supporters. The campaign has mailed out thousands of DVDs to Iowa Democrats outlining Edwards' proposed health care plan and has run commercials touting his opposition to the Iraq war. Leistikow said the campaign relies on visits from Edwards himself to make the strongest case. "We're giving people the chance to see him in small communities, town halls and house parties to let them see he's the candidate who's got the most substantive answers and the strongest ideas for change," Leistikow said. "We always sign up a lot of people after they see him."

Obama has perhaps the largest field operation in Iowa, with 29 offices across the state and more scheduled to open soon. But Steve Hildebrand, Obama's top field organizer, acknowledged that the Illinois senator remains "the new kid on the block." "A lot of Iowa voters still don't know much about Barack, and we are going up against the woman who has tried to portray herself as the eventual nominee. We have a big job ahead of us," Hildebrand said. To that end, the campaign has run television commercials outlining Obama's biography and has mailed a biographical DVD to thousands of past caucus-goers. It is also relying on extensive phone banking and one-on-one meetings. Volunteers and staff are all on hand to make the pitch to voters, and surrogates like campaign manager David Plouffe and media adviser David Axelrod have flown in to help out. Obama finished a five-day bus tour of the state last week during which he met with voters in a variety of small and medium-size settings. He's stepped up those appearances in part to address grumbles from Iowa activists early in the campaign that he was favoring large rallies over more intimate gatherings Iowa caucus-goers have come to expect. As for Obama's much-touted effort to bring new and younger people into the political process, Hildebrand said the effort was full speed ahead in Iowa - a tall order, since just 10 percent of Democratic caucus-goers in 2004 were under 35. "We have a very motivated base of supporters - young people, others - and we're not going to have any difficulty getting to them to show up on the most important day in the election," Hildebrand said. He said the campaign expected to see a number of Republicans and independents show up on caucus night, in order to re-register as Democrats to support Obama.

Among the other candidates, Bill Richardson has mounted an aggressive push in Iowa in recent weeks and has 13 offices in the state. Chris Dodd has eight offices, and Joe Biden has six. Both have spent considerable time in the state in the past month, even as they struggle in polls.

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Public support for Mitt Romney among Republican Party supporters in Iowa increased this month, according to a poll by Zogby International for NewsMax. 33 per cent of likely GOP voters in the Hawkeye State would back the former Massachusetts governor in the 2008 United States presidential caucus.

Former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani is second with 14 per cent, followed by actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson with 12 per cent, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee with eight per cent, and Arizona senator John McCain with six per cent. Support is lower for Kansas senator Sam Brownback, Colorado congressman Tom Tancredo, Texas congressman Ron Paul, and California congressman Duncan Hunter.

On Aug. 11, Romney won the Iowa straw poll with 31 per cent of the vote. Giuliani and McCain did not take part in the process.

In the sample of Democratic Party supporters, New York senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is first with 30 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 23 per cent, Illinois senator Barack Obama with 19 per cent, and New Mexico governor Bill Richardson with 10 per cent. Support is lower for Delaware senator Joe Biden, Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich, Connecticut senator Chris Dodd, and former Alaska senator Mike Gravel.

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.

NEW YORK - Could the 2008 presidential election come down to a choice between two New Yorkers? It sure looks that way today, as New York Sen. Hillary Clinton and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani remain the clear front-runners for their respective party's nominations in the latest FOX News poll. While the leaders remain the same, there has been some re-arranging among the top tier candidates on the Republican side, as Mitt Romney bests John McCain for the first time.

The new poll shows that Clinton holds a double-digit lead over Barack Obama, topping him by 13 percentage points - 38 percent to 25 percent - among Democrats. That's down slightly from a 16-point edge in July. John Edwards is third and is now in single digits with 8 percent.

Some of the recent squabbling among the Democratic front-runners may be turning off some voters, because despite lots of campaigning and debates, the number of undecided Democratic voters is 15 percent today - double the number that said they were unsure two months ago (7 percent, June 26-27).

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Fred Thompson holds the top spot among the Republican Party's presidential hopefuls in South Carolina, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. 23 per cent of GOP supporters in the Palmetto State would vote for the actor and former Tennessee senator in the 2008 primary.

Former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani is second with 21 per cent, followed by Arizona senator John McCain with 14 per cent, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney with 10 per cent, and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee with six per cent.

In the sample of Democratic Party supporters, New York senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is first with 38 per cent, followed by Illinois senator Barack Obama with 30 per cent, former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 13 per cent, Delaware senator Joe Biden with three per cent, and New Mexico governor Bill Richardson with two per cent.

The Democratic presidential primary in South Carolina is tentatively scheduled for Jan. 29, 2008, after the Iowa and Nevada caucuses and the New Hampshire primary. The Republican contest in the Palmetto State is expected to take place on Jan. 19.

In 2004, Edwards won the Democratic South Carolina primary with 45 per cent of the vote, followed by Massachusetts senator John Kerry with 30 per cent, reverend Al Sharpton with 10 per cent, retired general Wesley Clark with seven per cent, former Vermont governor Howard Dean with five per cent, and Connecticut senator Joe Lieberman with two per cent. Incumbent president George W. Bush won the Republican convention unopposed.

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Hillary Rodham Clinton holds a slight advantage against a prospective Republican presidential nominee in the United States, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. 46 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator, while 44 per cent would vote for Arizona senator John McCain.

Support for both Rodham Clinton and McCain in this match-up increased by one point since early August. In a separate contest, Rodham Clinton holds an 11-point advantage over former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney

Yesterday, Rodham Clinton discussed her views on the Iraq war, saying, "It is abundantly clear that there is no military solution to the sectarian fighting in Iraq. We need to stop refereeing the war, and start getting out now." The New York senator also expressed hope for Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki to be replaced "with a less divisive and more unifying figure."

In American elections, candidates require 270 votes in the Electoral College to win the White House. In November 2004, Republican George W. Bush earned a second term after securing 286 electoral votes from 31 states. Democratic nominee John Kerry received 252 electoral votes from 19 states and the District of Columbia.

Bush is ineligible for a third term in office. The next presidential election is scheduled for November 2008.

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

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Hillary Rodham Clinton maintains a high level of support in the race for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination in the United States, according to a poll by Gallup released by USA Today. 42 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in a 2008 primary.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 21 per cent, followed by former U.S. vice-president Al Gore with 15 per cent, and 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 Aug. 21, Obama discussed his views on Cuba in an op-ed published in the Miami Herald, writing, "We must not lose sight of our fundamental goal: freedom in Cuba. At the same time, we should be pragmatic in our approach and clear-sighted about the effects of our policies. We all know the power of the freedom and opportunity that America at its best has both embodied and advanced."

"My order here is deliberate," said Clinton, a New York senator. "In order to forge a consensus on universal health care, we need to assure people that they will get the quality they expect at a cost they can afford."

"Too often, and in too many places, our health care system hurts us instead of helps us," Clinton said at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center. "It hurts doctors, who aren't rewarded for providing the best care and are often punished for it financially. It hurts nurses who are asked to work longer hours, caring for more patients with fewer resources. And it hurts patients, who are forced to make complicated medical decisions without basic information about their conditions and options."

To improve quality, Clinton said she would promote physician certification programs that help doctors keep up with the latest advancements, increasing Medicare reimbursements for doctors who participate in them. Nursing care would get a boost in the form of $300 million to expand enrollment in nursing schools, create mentoring programs for recent graduates and recruit more minorities into the profession. "The nursing shortage has become a nursing crisis, and that means it is a crisis for everyone," Clinton said. "Our nurses are truly the eyes and ears, and in many ways the heart and soul of our health care system. When we've got fewer nurses, working longer hours and serving more patients, the result can be worse outcomes."

Patients, too, can play a role in improving the quality of health care they receive, she said, if they are given more information about their treatment options. She praised Dartmouth-Hitchcock's Center for Shared Decision Making, saying she would like to see similar programs nationwide.

Clinton also called for overhauling a reimbursement system that she said often punishes doctors for doing the right thing - spending time with patients or working with their colleagues to take a collaborative approach. She proposes higher payments to providers who use teams to provide coordinated care and ending payments for preventable infections and injuries sustained during hospital stays.

"We need a system that encourages instead of discourages quality," she said.

Speaking later in Manchester, Clinton said her universal health care plan would not involve a single-payer government system. Instead, she said, she would consider expanding Medicare and allow people to join the federal employees insurance program. "I think you don't want to take choices away from Americans. We're big on choice here. But you've got to have some framework so the choices work better," she said. Clinton said she also would consider allowing people to purchase health insurance from companies outside their states. "There is no really strong argument anymore why you couldn't buy insurance across state lines to get better deals," she said. "Why should you be limited to what companies want to come into New Hampshire?"

During his swan-song media tour last week, departing White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove made a point of telling everyone who would listen that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) is "fatally flawed" as a candidate because she has a historically high negative public impression. "She enters the general election campaign with the highest negatives of any candidate in the history of the Gallup Poll," he said Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press."

Not so fast, says Gallup. In a new analysis posted today, Gallup's Frank Newport, Jeffrey M. Jones and Joseph Carroll write that "a review of historical Gallup data suggests that contrary to Rove's assertions, her current image ratings do not necessarily spell defeat." While it is true that Clinton has high unfavorable ratings, they write, her numbers are not that different from at least two other candidates who have gone on to win -- Bill Clinton in 1992 and George W. Bush in 2004.

Here's the data: In the latest Gallup poll, Hillary Clinton is viewed favorably by 47 percent and unfavorably by 48 percent. That's definitely not an enviable position for a candidate. But the Gallup crew points out that Bill Clinton's unfavorability rating hit 49 percent in April 1992 and Bush's hit 47 percent at the end of January and beginning of February 2004. Both, obviously, went on to win. In some of his interviews, Rove seemed to be stressing the fact that her negatives are so high so early in the campaign, the presumption being that they could only go up as the campaign progresses. The Gallup guys note that she's no ordinary candidate trying to introduce herself to the voting public and that her numbers have gone up and down over the years and could again.

"Clinton is already known to almost all Americans," they write, "and opinions of her are already divided along partisan lines, so the normal campaign dynamics likely do not apply to her. But just as it is possible for Clinton's image to improve during the campaign, it ... also could get worse. However, that would more than likely be the result of a specific negative incident, rather than the normal dynamics of a presidential campaign."

By Peter Baker, The Washington Post, August 22, 2007

Two pieces of good news for Hillary Clinton's campaign today:

1) A new Gallup poll shows her shows her wide lead holding steady - a 48 to 25 percent margin over Barack Obama, with John Edwards at 13 percent. Yes, it's easy to dismiss national polls like this, given the momentum that Obama and Edwards are banking on from success in the early states next January. But...

2) There's a new early state in the mix, and it's a good venue for Hillary. Michigan is now set to schedule a primary for January 15, potentially making it the third of the early nominating contests.

Michigan's pols are unanimous in wanting to move their date up, but the hidden story here is the debate over whether the January 15 contest should be a primary or a caucus. Traditionally, the labor-dominated state has held a Democratic caucus, which has skewed the results in favor of candidates on the left - like Jesse Jackson, whose finest hour as a presidential candidate came with his landslide win in Michigan's '88 caucuses, and Jerry Brown, who finished a surprising second in 1992 (helping to usher Paul Tsongas from the Democratic race).

Not surprisingly, John Edwards' supporters in the state - most notably U.S. Rep. Bart Stupak and former Rep. (and current Edwards campaign manager) David Bonior - argued for a caucus in '08. But Republicans and key Democrats - like Governor Jennifer Granholm - wanted a primary, in which labors influence is not as pronounced and non-interest group voters have more of a voice. With today's 21-17 state Senate vote, Granholm and the Republicans won out - and so did Hillary.

By Steve Kornacki, The New York Observer, August 22, 2007

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Leading Democratic Party presidential hopeful, Hillary Clinton, on Wednesday urged the Iraqi parliament to get rid of embattled Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki saying he was not up to the job.

"I share Senator Levin's hope that the Iraqi parliament will replace Prime Minister Maliki with a less divisive and more unifying figure when it returns in a few weeks."

Earlier Wednesday, President George W. Bush reaffirmed his support for the Iraqi leader, saying he was "a good guy, good man, with a difficult job, and I support him."

Clinton, who voted for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, has made withdrawing the 160,000 troops in the country a plank of her campaign to win the Democratic Party nomination for the 2008 presidential elections. "It is abundantly clear that there is no military solution to the sectarian fighting in Iraq. We need to stop refereeing the war, and start getting out now," she reiterated in her statement Wednesday.

AFP, August 22, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton is the top presidential contender for voters in the United States, according to a poll by the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. At least 46 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in head-to-head 2008 contests.

Rodham Clinton holds a three-point lead over former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, a six-point advantage over Arizona senator John McCain, and an 11-point lead over actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson.

In other match-ups, Illinois senator Barack Obama is tied with Giuliani, but holds a four-point lead over McCain and an 11-point advantage over Thompson. Former North Carolina senator John Edwards trails Giuliani by a point, but holds an eight-point lead over McCain, and a 17-point advantage over Thompson.

On Aug. 20, Arkansas governor Mike Beebe endorsed Rodham Clinton, saying, "Senator Clinton has the right vision for Arkansas and the right vision for America. And that’s why I know she is the Democrat with the best chance of winning this state in November of 2008." Jimmy Carter in 1976-and former governor Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996-are the only Democrats to carry Arkansas in a presidential election since 1968.

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, August 22, 2007

Moments after Sen. Barack Obama stepped off a Kansas City stage Tuesday, U.S. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver endorsed Sen. Hillary Clinton for president.

"I ultimately came down on the side of loyalty," the Missouri Democrat told reporters at the Veterans of Foreign Wars convention. "I've been friends with Mrs. Clinton. I think she can win."

Cleaver bristled at the suggestion that his decision not to endorse Obama was a surprise.

"For me ... to go around trying to make decisions based on race would be almost stupid," he said. "That's an obscene way for us to make political decisions."

Cleaver said he hoped to support Obama for president in 2016, when the Illinois Democrat would be, in Cleaver's view, the presumptive nominee.

Cleaver said he would serve as co-chairman of Clinton's Missouri campaign and make appearances on her behalf.

Clinton later released a statement, saying of Cleaver's endorsement, "I am delighted he will help lead our efforts in Missouri and across the country."

By Dave Helling, The Kansas City Star, August 21, 2007

So it came as a great relief when Clinton emerged as the consensus winner during that first debate in Orangeburg, S.C., and has increased her lead to as much as 20 percentage points after seven debates and forums. Now, it's Obama who wants to limit the number of future debates to the five sanctioned by the Democratic National Committee. A major Clinton misstep could wipe away her gains, and Obama seems to be gaining confidence, but Clinton's staff now views the format as a showcase for her steady style of leadership at a time when competence is cool in American politics.

"I don't think anyone could anticipate how well she's done, the extent to which the debates have had on the rise in the polls," Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson said.

No candidate has benefitted as much from primary debates since Ronald Reagan in 1980, said Northeastern University Professor Alan Schroeder, a debate expert. "Clinton has been a big surprise," he said. "She was very reluctant to engage in these debates, but they have played favorably into her hand against expectations. She has had more gravitas than other people on the stage and she seems completely unrattled."

That's a big improvement from earlier, lackluster debates in 2000 and 2006. Clinton's most famous debate moment in 2000 was a flinch -- after Rick Lazio made his ill-advised trip to her podium.

The difference between Clinton in 2007 and 2000 is "night and day," said a person close to Clinton. "She's much more comfortable than she was, much more in command."

Preparation has been a key. Clinton often stages elaborate multiplayer practices in Washington or on the road, with a rotating cast of aides, friends and consultants. No one actor has adopted the role of Obama, but Democratic Leadership Council president Bruce Reed does a dead-on Edwards. Clinton's debate consigliere is Robert Barnett, a former high school debate champ-turned-corporate lawyer who has served as a Democratic verbal coach for 30 years. Clinton flew Barnett to Des Moines for this week's debate and while he doesn't play Edwards or Obama in the prep sessions (he's not bad as Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd), he offers unique insights on both. In 2004, Barnett played Dick Cheney during Edwards' vice-presidential debate prep sessions and he knows Obama well, having negotiated a book deal for him.

Whatever the reason, Clinton has been able to sprinkle pixie dust on her negatives during the debates. On the stump, critics say she's stiff, cold, wonky and schoolmarmish. Yet in the presence of her opponents, those same attributes come across as dignity, composure, intelligence and maturity.

"She's a highly skilled debater," says Obama adviser David Axelrod, quickly adding, "She's highly articulate expressing the thinking of Washington."

Clinton aides said their candidate's best moment in the debates -- and perhaps the apex of the six-month-old campaign -- was at her debut in Orangeburg. Asked how he would respond to new terror attacks on U.S. cities, Obama said he would talk to allies and investigate the origins of the attack; Clinton shot back, "A president must move as swiftly as is prudent to retaliate."

Her people aren't as sure about her attack on Obama following July's YouTube debate, when she called him "naive" for suggesting he'd talk face-to-face with dictators. Obama's team rolled with the punch, hammering Clinton's foreign policy as "Bush-Cheney lite" and defining Obama as the candidate of change. Obama's camp marks that exchange as the start of his comeback. The polls haven't yet reflected that, but there are signs that Clinton may be vulnerable to heightened debate expectations.

By Glenn Thrush, Newsday, August 21, 2007

She also brought in more Arkansas campaign money in a single day than former Ark. governor Mike Huckabee, a Republican contender, had raised in the state in the first half of the year. Clinton surpassed all presidential rivals in fundraising in the state by bringing in $650,000 in contributions Monday, her campaign said Tuesday.

The Democratic senator from New York's campaign said she raised $400,000 at a fundraiser at the Little Rock home of Kaki Hockersmith and Max Hehlburger Monday and earlier raised $200,000 at the Fayetteville home of Jim Hatfield and Suzie Stephens. Clinton also raised about $50,000 at a fundraiser at the Little Rock Zoo.

Clinton's one-day tally exceeds the $552,287 that Huckabee had raised from January through June. Clinton led her Democratic rivals in fundraising in the state but had trailed Huckabee.

"It actually exceeds expectations," said Robert McLarty, a political consultant and spokesman for Clinton's campaign in Arkansas, who added the campaign initially had expected to raise $500,000 with the events. "We had goals and this went beyond them. All three events were completely packed with people and were spilling outside as well. It was a great response from Arkansans."

Clinton picked up Democratic Gov. Mike Beebe's endorsement Monday and in separate appearances in Fayetteville and Little Rock promised that she would be a familiar face in Arkansas, where her husband served as attorney general and governor before being elected president in 1992.

McLarty said Clinton planned to return to Arkansas in September to attend events marking the 50th anniversary of Little Rock Central High School's integration. "We can win this election and I intend to win Arkansas with your help," Clinton told a crowd of about 200 people in front of the state Capitol. "I not only know the difference between Mountain Home and Mountain View and not only have been to Magnolia and a lot of other places throughout the state, but I intend to campaign throughout Arkansas. I'm going to go throughout the state with the governor, with my friends, taking the message of change and experience throughout this state."

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., had campaigned for Beebe in last year's governor's race but the Arkansas governor said Monday that Clinton had more experience.

"I think he'd make a wonderful president at some point, but I think the experience factor suggests that experience lands with Senator Clinton," Beebe said. "I think he needs a little more seasoning, but I think he's a fine man and I think the world of him."

Associated Press, August 21, 2007

Either action will continue the assault on the status of Iowa and New Hampshire, whose position at the front of the nominating calendar has for decades earned the states a flood of attention from presidential candidates. Officials in those states vowed yesterday to move their voting forward if Michigan or another state forces their hand.

"If they do that, it would mean we would not be any later than seven days before, which is the 8th," New Hampshire Secretary of State William M. Gardner said of Michigan's move. "If they actually do that, we will adjust to it." Gardner made the same pledge earlier this month, when South Carolina Republicans announced they were moving their primary to Jan. 19. New Hampshire law requires that its primary be at least seven days before any similar presidential contest.

In Iowa, a spokesman for Gov. Chet Culver (D) reiterated the governor's pledge to maintain the state's decades-long tradition of holding caucuses at least eight days before the New Hampshire primary. "The governor is not into playing the speculation game," spokesman Brad Anderson said. "He has said all along that people need to sit tight, take a deep breath, and he will wait until the other participants make a move. His goal is the same: The caucuses will be the first in the nation, and they will be in January 2008."

But Michigan's change could make it difficult for Culver to live up to that pledge. If Michigan moves to the 15th, New Hampshire probably would switch to the 8th and, under Culver's guidelines, Iowa would shift to New Year's Day. Culver would be likely to face pressure to move voting to mid-December or closer to the New Hampshire primary to avoid conflicts with the holidays.

Michigan officials and state party leaders said such considerations will not sway them from choosing an earlier date. They said they are determined to force presidential candidates in both parties to pay attention to issues that are important to Michigan voters: health care, the environment, jobs and globalization's effect on the economy.

The results of those negotiations could be known by tomorrow, when two bills focused on the primary calendar are due to be considered in the state Senate. The bills would set the primary date on Jan. 29 or Feb. 5, but they are likely to be amended to reflect agreement about Jan. 15, sources said.

State Sen. Michelle McManus (R), the sponsor of one of those bills, said she thinks her party is eager to vote earlier. "For us to raise our state's profile in the national arena and to encourage participation throughout . . . we need to be in the mix," McManus said. "There's a lot of candidates out there on both sides. I certainly believe that the next president needs to share the concerns of our state."

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Many voters in the Natural State would back Hillary Rodham Clinton in the 2008 United States presidential election, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. At least 55 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in head-to-head contests against four prospective Republican nominees.

Rodham Clinton holds an eight-point lead over New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, a nine-point advantage over actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson, a 23-point lead over Arizona senator John McCain, and a 32-point advantage over former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.

In 2004, Republican George W. Bush won the Natural State's six electoral votes, with 54 per cent of the vote. Jimmy Carter in 1976-and former governor Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996-are the only Democrats to carry Arkansas in a presidential election since 1968.

Illinois Senator Barack Obama's support averages 23% for the first three weeks in August. That's down slightly from 25% in July, 26% in June, and 27% in May. Obama peaked on the eve of the first Presidential debate. For the month of April, his support averaged 31%.

Former North Carolina Senate John Edwards has consistently hovered in the low-to-mid teens, a distant third.

In addition to leading the national polls, Clinton also leads the early Primaries in New Hampshire and Florida.

It is worth noting that Clinton's numbers are down slightly from the first week in August. However, the frontrunner has polled above the 40% mark for four straight weeks, a level she never reached earlier in the year. Rasmussen Reports continues to see Hillary Clinton as the default candidate of the Democratic Party. It is likely that she will win the nomination unless something dramatically shakes up the race.

Obama's camp has argued that national polls are meaningless because the early state polls show a more competitive scenario. It is true that a solid defeat of Clinton in Iowa and New Hampshire could radically alter the race. However, it would have to be a very solid victory to knock Clinton out of frontrunner status.

Rasmussen Reports has released a series of state polls matching Clinton against a variety of Republican hopefuls. In Arkansas, the data suggests that Clinton could achieve a rare Democratic victory in a southern state. In Oregon, on the other hand, Clinton is viewed unfavorably by 51% and will have to work to keep that state in the Democratic column. Other state data was released last week for Ohio, Florida, Colorado, New Hampshire, Wisconsin and Michigan.

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.

Less than a week after former Sen. John Edwards' (D-N.C.) campaign acknowledged it was moving some staff out of Nevada and into other early primary states, a key staffer in the state has left his post.

Preston Elliott, who had been serving as Edwards' field director in Nevada, is leaving that post to become the deputy political director of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, according to an e-mail forwarded to The Fix.

The departure is sure to stoke rumors that Edwards is not seriously contesting the Nevada caucus, which was added to the early nominating calendar in 2006 by the Democratic National Committee.

Edwards' campaign continues to deny that the staff reshuffling in Nevada should be read as an indicator of how seriously he will play in the state. "We're strongly committed to Nevada, we've visited the state more than any other candidate, and we know that our good relationships with labor and our message of bold change puts us in a great position to win there," said Eric Schultz, a spokesman for the campaign.

But, the loss of Elliott is a blow -- symbolic or not -- to Edwards' campaign in Nevada. The questions surrounding Edwards' viability in Nevada represent a marked change from earlier in the year when it appeared as though Nevada would be a stronghold for the former Senator due to his relentless courting of organized labor.

Elliott, a Montana native, is experienced political hand, having done field work on Senate races in Alaska in 2004 and Montana in 2006.

By Chris Cillizza, The Washington Post, August 20, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Rudy Giuliani remains the top United States presidential contender for Republican Party supporters in the Sunshine State, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. 30 per cent of likely GOP primary voters in Florida would back the former New York City mayor in next year's primary.

Actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson is second with 17 per cent, followed by former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney with 15 per cent, Arizona senator John McCain with five per cent, and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee with five per cent.

In the sample of Democratic Party supporters, New York senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is first with 43 per cent, followed by Illinois senator Barack Obama with 24 per cent, and former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 11 per cent.

Earlier this year, a law passed in Florida mandates for the state's presidential primaries to be held either on the first Tuesday of February, or seven days after the New Hampshire contest. The Republican and Democratic primaries in Florida are tentatively scheduled for Jan. 29, 2008.

In 2004, Massachusetts senator John Kerry won the Democratic Florida primary with 77 per cent of the vote. The Republican contest was cancelled, after incumbent George W. Bush was nominated by the state's party.

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Many voters in the Great Lake State voice support for Hillary Rodham Clinton in the 2008 United States presidential election, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. At least 49 per cent of respondents would back the New York senator in head-to-head contests against four prospective Republican nominees.

Rodham Clinton holds a nine-point lead over New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, a 13-point advantage over actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson, a seven-point lead over Arizona senator John McCain, and a 10-point advantage over former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.

In 2004, Democrat John Kerry won Michigan's 17 electoral votes, with 51 per cent of the vote. The last Republican to carry the Great Lake State in a U.S. presidential election was George H. Bush in 1988.

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, August 20, 2007

LITTLE ROCK - Presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton won the endorsement Monday of the governor of Arkansas, where she was first lady for 12 years.

"We can win this election and I intend to win Arkansas with your help," Clinton told a crowd of about 200 people in front of the state Capitol. "I'm going to go throughout the state with the governor, with my friends, taking the message of change and experience throughout this state."

With Gov. Mike Beebe standing at her side, Clinton dismissed the idea that voters must choose between change or experience. "There seemed to be a little bit of a debate about do we need change or do we need experience. Well, we need both. It's not either or," Clinton said. "And I'm going to take my 35 years of experience and I'm going to put it to work on behalf of the change we need in Washington on day one."

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., had campaigned for Beebe in last year's governor's race but the Arkansas governor said Monday that Clinton had more experience.

"I think he'd make a wonderful president at some point, but I think the experience factor suggests that experience lands with Senator Clinton," Beebe said. "I think he needs a little more seasoning, but I think he's a fine man and I think the world of him."

Associated Press, August 20, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Hillary Rodham Clinton remains the top presidential contender for Democratic Party supporters in the United States, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. 38 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in a 2008 primary.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 24 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 12 per cent, and New Mexico governor Bill Richardson with three per cent.

On Aug. 17, Richardson called for and end to the prosecution of Americans who rely on medical marijuana, declaring, "At a time when the scourge of meth is coming across the border, and cocaine and heroin use continues to ravage our communities, the federal government should be cracking down on real criminals-not people who are trying to help those in pain."

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Hillary Rodham Clinton holds a high level of public backing in California, according to a poll by Field. 49 per cent of Democratic Party supporters in the Golden State would vote for the New York senator in the 2008 United States presidential primary.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 19 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 10 per cent. Support is lower for New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, Delaware senator Joe Biden, Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich, Connecticut senator Chris Dodd, and former Alaska senator Mike Gravel.

In the sample of Republican Party supporters, former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani is first with 35 per cent, followed by former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney with 14 per cent, actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson with 13 per cent, and Arizona senator John McCain with nine per cent. Support is lower for Colorado congressman Tom Tancredo, California congressman Duncan Hunter, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, Kansas senator Sam Brownback, Texas congressman Ron Paul, and former Wisconsin governor Tommy Thompson.

The Republican and Democratic presidential primaries in California will take place on Feb. 5, 2008. In 2004, Massachusetts senator John Kerry won the Democratic California primary with 64 per cent of the vote. Incumbent president George W. Bush won the Republican contest unopposed.

DES MOINES, Iowa --Even as their differences on the issues become more pronounced, the Democratic presidential front-runners seem to agree on one thing: The schedule of candidate forums and debates has become overwhelming.

David Plouffe, Sen. Barack Obama's campaign manager, said Saturday, "We simply cannot continue to hopscotch from forum to forum and run a campaign true to the bottom-up movement for change that propelled Barack into this race." He said Obama was committed to five remaining debates sanctioned by the Democratic National Committee, two Iowa debates in December and one in Florida on Sept. 9. But after that, Plouffe said, the campaign will limit the number of debates Obama attends. Other campaigns have grumbled privately about the same thing and some will probably follow suit. The forums are virtually the only way for lesser-known candidates like former Sen. Mike Gravel and Rep. Dennis Kucinich to get attention.

Meanwhile, the top contenders continue to fight over the role big money plays in politics. Obama has railed against "lobby-driven, divisive politics," a coded shot at rival Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton. Former Sen. John Edwards was urging his rivals and the party to distance themselves from lobbyists and their money, warning that Democrats risk being seen as a "party of Washington insiders."

Lately, Clinton has sought to cast herself as a defender of working families, saying "the American middle class is under attack" and promising to reverse that.

By Mike Glover, Associated Press, August 19, 2007

Barack Obama doesn't strike me as a guy who spends much time in saloons, but he's probably starting to get that last call feeling. He has to know his presidential campaign is running out of time.

Sen. Hillary Clinton, she of the high negatives and polarizing personality, is pulling away from the Illinois rookie. Like water running downhill, she's filling all the cracks and crevices and leaving him no safe place to stand. The bigger her lead in the polls, the more gaffes he makes, which produces even bigger numbers for her. She has about a 20-point lead in national surveys, is now ahead in all the early states and has huge leads in delegate-rich Florida and California. Even Obama's wife, Michelle, is starting to show the strains, ominously warning an Iowa crowd that "The game of politics is to make you afraid, so that you don't think!"

Her point, presumably, was that voters should be afraid if her husband loses. Hmmm.

Time matters. We're only about four months from the first votes, and less when you realize the campaigns will be on holiday ice for much of December. If Obama has a second act beyond the fresh-face, outside-Washington shtick, tonight's debate in Iowa would be a good time to start using it.

Clinton's big lead is a testament to her experience and her play-it-safe approach as well as to his careless mistakes on foreign policy. While she can't assume anything yet, she is building an advantage against the Republican pick. Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney are still forced to grovel before the archconservative wing of the GOP, while Clinton has the luxury of being able to tack toward the center. Indeed, one of the biggest surprises of the Democratic race is that Clinton is fending off the far-left challenges of Obama and former senator, and future lobbyist, John Edwards, without pandering in extremis.

Could it be that the wackadoo wing is growing up? Or are the adults taking over from the burn-the-house down radicals?

Either way, Clinton has benefited. When the campaign started, her 2002 pro-war vote had the potential to derail her. While it is still Obama's strong suit - he refers to it every time Iraq comes up - it clearly doesn't have the potency it did. It's almost as though voter anger has given way to cooler calculations about who is more ready to be President.

It's also true that Clinton has sometimes met the wackadoos halfway. Her vote against troop funding last May in the fight over Iraq timetables was a signal of her no-limits determination to win the nomination. It was, however, a serious mistake for anyone who wants to be commander in chief and will certainly be the focus of a GOP commercial in the general election. But in general, she has also been more realistic about Iraq. Her recent comments that withdrawal could not be immediate and total struck the right balance, as have her plans to continue fighting Al Qaeda. You'll know she is ready for the general election when she answers Giuliani's challenge and throws off the PC shackles to use the phrase "Islamic terrorists."

Obama needs to get the momentum back fast, but the problem is that debates have not helped. Clinton's gotten better at them and he's gotten worse. His only hope is to stay close and pull out at least two early state victories.

The one thing he can't count on is help from Clinton, who is less likely now to make big mistakes. Even the attacks from Karl Rove and Giuliani, designed to energize the GOP base, have strengthened her.

All of which adds up to Obama being alone at the bar. As bartenders have been known to say in such sad moments, you don't have to go home, but you can't stay here.

By Michael Goodwin, NY Daily News, August 19, 2007

"It is so important that we not oversell this,'' Clinton said at the ABC News-sponsored forum in Des Moines, Iowa. Edwards concurred, saying it "would be hard'' to move troops out within six months, as suggested by New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, while Obama said U.S. options are limited. "George Bush drove the bus into the ditch and there are only so many ways you can pull that bus out of the ditch,'' the Illinois Democrat said.

The debate was the first among the Democrats running for president held in the state that traditionally kicks off the official nomination contests with its party caucuses in January.

The candidates continued a discussion about whether Obama has enough experience to be president, and Clinton, of New York, was questioned about whether polls showing more than 40 percent of the public views her unfavorably suggest she is too polarizing a figure to lead the party to victory in 2008. In a previous debate, Obama said he would be willing to meet unconditionally with hostile foreign leaders during his first year in office.

Debate on Experience

In today's forum, Clinton said no president "should give away the bargaining chip of a personal meeting with any leader,'' and Senator Joseph Biden of Delaware said he stood by an earlier statement that Obama isn't ready for the job. "To prepare for this debate I rode in the bumper cars at the state fair,'' Obama, 46, said, drawing laughter from the audience. Critics aren't arguing with "the substance of my positions,'' the first-term senator said. "I think that there's been some political maneuvering taking place over the last couple of weeks.''

Clinton, 59, took her turn on defense when the candidates were asked whether Democrats should be worried that nominating the former first lady will hurt the party.

Lobbyist Donations

The nation needs someone who "can break out of the political patterns that we've been in over the last 20 years,'' Obama said. Edwards, 54, a former senator from North Carolina who is trailing Clinton and Obama in national polls and in raising money, suggested her ties to lobbyists will prevent her from being able to change Washington. "These people will never give away power voluntarily,'' he said, renewing his call for Clinton to foreswear lobbyist contributions. "We have to take their power away from them.''

Clinton said her critics are making an "artificial distinction,'' because while Edwards and Obama don't take money directly from lobbyists they accept donations from law firms that hire lobbyists. "It's the people who employ the lobbyists who are behind all the money in American politics,'' she said.

She said comments made last week by Karl Rove, President George W Bush's political adviser, that Clinton enters the primary season with higher negative poll ratings than any previous frontrunner show she is the best candidate to beat the Republicans next year.

Nuclear Weapons

Clinton also defended comments she made in a Bloomberg News interview in 2006 that she would rule out using nuclear weapons against Iran. She criticized Obama for a recent comment that he wouldn't use nuclear weapons against terrorists. "This was a brush back against this administration which has been reckless and provocative,'' she said of her earlier statement, whereas Obama's remark was on "hypotheticals'' that shouldn't be addressed by a presidential candidate.

On the war, Richardson was alone in saying U.S. troops should withdraw from Iraq in six to eight months, leaving no residual forces behind to protect civilian personnel.

Biden led the other Democrats in disagreeing. "It's time to start to level with the American people,'' Biden said. "If we leave Iraq and we leave it in chaos, there'll be regional war. The regional war will engulf us for a generation.''

Clinton said Biden is "absolutely right,'' cautioning that "this is going to be very dangerous and very difficult'' and "a lot of people don't like to hear that.'' Edwards said a timetable of nine or 10 months is more reasonable. Obama said Biden is right and that "this is not going to be a simple operation.''

When the eight candidates were asked whether there was a major issue where they didn't tell the whole truth, Clinton and Edwards cited their votes to authorize Bush to use military force in Iraq.

Clinton said while she thought at the time that her vote was an "appropriate approach.'' Looking back on it "I wouldn't have voted that way again,'' she said. "Obviously for me that is a great regret.'' Edwards said that he had a "huge internal conflict'' about the war authorization that he didn't express at the time.

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - In a three-person contest, a large number of Democratic Party supporters in the United States prefer Hillary Rodham Clinton as a presidential nominee in 2008, according to a poll by CBS News. 45 per cent of respondents would like to see the New York senator as their candidate, up two points in a month.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 25 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 14 per cent.

On Aug. 15, Obama called for a different approach to federal politics, saying, "Part of the problem here is not just George Bush and the White House. We can't just change political parties and continue to do the same kind of things we've been doing. We can't just go about business as usual and think it's going to turn out differently."

LITTLE ROCK - Gov. Mike Beebe will endorse New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, a former Arkansas first lady, next week in her bid for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination, sources said Friday.

Sources close to Clinton's campaign told The Associated Press that Beebe would make the announcement at an event Monday in the state Capitol. The sources spoke on condition of anonymity to avoid pre-empting Beebe's public announcement. Beebe spokesman Matt DeCample said the governor would appear with Clinton at an event at the Capitol Monday afternoon, but would not say whether Beebe would endorse her.

Clinton has already won the backing of top Democrats in Arkansas, where husband Bill Clinton served 12 years as governor before beginning two terms as president in 1993.

Attorney General Dustin McDaniel is chairing Hillary Clinton's campaign in the state and she has won the endorsement of four of the five Democratic members of the state's congressional delegation.

The senator, who headlined a fundraiser for the state Democratic Party earlier this summer, plans to return to Arkansas on Monday for a series of fundraisers in Fayetteville and Little Rock. She also intends to privately meet with Democratic state legislators about her bid. Beebe said Wednesday he planned to attend a fundraiser for the presidential candidate but was mum on whether he would back her presidential campaign. "If I do, you'll certainly know it because I'll announce it," Beebe said. "It's too early to talk about that. It's not Monday."

Sen. Mark Pryor and Reps. Marion Berry, Mike Ross and Vic Snyder, all D-Ark., have publicly backed Clinton's presidential bid. Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., has not endorsed anyone in the presidential race.

Fundraising figures show Clinton has raised $145,292 in the state, more than any of the other Democratic presidential candidates but less than the $552,287 raised by former Gov. Mike Huckabee, a Republican presidential hopeful.

Associated Press, August 17, 2007

TRENTON -- Presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton picked up the endorsement of Rep. Bill Pascrell on Thursday, adding to a list of longtime Democrats to lead her New Jersey campaign.
Pascrell, a former Paterson mayor who was elected to Congress in 1996, will advise the campaign on homeland security matters.

"Hillary Clinton has been a leading advocate for our first responders affected by 9/11 and for strengthening our homeland security," Pascrell said in a statement.

Clinton also has the endorsement of Governor Corzine, U.S. Sen. Bob Menendez, Reps. Frank Pallone Jr. and Rob Andrews, and former Govs. Brendan Byrne and James J. Florio.

A Rutgers-Eagleton Institute poll last week found that 45 percent of New Jersey Democrats would support Clinton in the primary, while 21 percent would choose her main rival, Sen. Barack Obama.

Clinton has a formidable opponent in former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, who is seeking the Republican nomination: The poll found them in a virtual tie. Last month, Rep. Steve Rothman, D-Fair Lawn, was named Obama's Northeast co-chairman, overseeing fund raising in nine states, including New Jersey. As of June 30, Clinton had raised more money in New Jersey: $2.4 million, about $1 million more than Obama.

By Elise Young, North Jersey.com, August 17, 2007

New survey shows Clinton dominating the Democratic field in California - Obama said to be losing his luster

The New York senator held a commanding lead over the Democratic field, with 49 percent support to 19 percent for Obama and 10 percent for former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards.

The survey of 418 Californians likely to vote in the Feb. 5 Democratic presidential primary showed Clinton leading -- and gaining support -- in every demographic category and California region measured.

"Apparently, Hillary has been faring well on the campaign trail. That's really what you have to attribute it to," said Mark DiCamillo, director of the California Field Poll.

By contrast, DiCamillo said Obama is losing luster with California voters since he burst onto the scene as the "the new face" drawing thousands of people to campaign rallies in Oakland and Los Angeles.

"I think what may be happening is that voters are filling in the blanks" as they learn more about Obama, DiCamillo said. "For some voters, maybe he is not as liberal as they wanted him to be and, for others, maybe he is not as conservative. "He was a shooting star at the beginning of the campaign. Now he is coming down to Earth."

Since March, Clinton has picked up support in particular among male voters and younger voters.

In the last state Field Poll, Obama led Clinton 39 percent to 38 percent among voters between the ages of 18 and 39. In the new poll, Clinton led him among the younger voters by 47 percent to 24 percent.

Meanwhile, she expanded her support among male Democrats from 41 percent in March to 47 percent in the latest poll taken Aug. 3-12.

The California poll results were similar to a recent national Gallup Poll, in which Clinton led among Democrats with 48 percent support to 16 percent for Obama and 12 percent for Edwards.

Officials of the Obama campaign have said they are counting on winning in early primary states -- he led in recent polls in Iowa and South Carolina -- to stir momentum for California. Obama has also outperformed Clinton in campaign fundraising this year.

But Luis Vizcaino, Clinton's California campaign spokesman, said her showing in the state Field Poll "reflects the amount of time, effort and commitment she has dedicated to California."

In the state's coastal counties, Clinton led with 48 percent to 19 percent for Obama and 11 percent for Edwards. She fared even better in inland counties, leading with 52 percent support to 17 percent for Obama and 7 percent for Edwards.

In a poll of likely Nov. 4, 2008, general election voters of all parties, Clinton also fared well against the top GOP contenders. In hypothetical matchups, she led former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani by 52 percent to 37 percent among California voters, held a 55 percent to 35 percent lead over former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and led by the same margin over undeclared candidate and former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson.

Obama led by 48 percent to 38 percent over Giuliani, 53 percent to 31 percent over Romney and 52 percent to 32 over Thompson. Edwards led Giuliani 47 percent to 42 percent, Romney by 52 percent to 33 percent and Thompson by 55 percent to 30 percent.

"There has been a lot of discussion about the fact that Hillary, if she were the nominee, would become a very divisive candidate and that would harm her general election chances," DiCamillo said. "But you really see no evidence of a greater weakness of a Clinton candidacy, compared to Obama or Edwards, against the leading Republicans."

Field Poll respondent and Fair Oaks resident Dan Wangberg, a Democrat who says he narrowly favors Clinton over Obama, said he very much can envision another Clinton in the White House. "I think Bill Clinton was a great president, and now it's the same as they said in 1992: You get two for one," Wangberg said. But poll respondent Jeff McMurray, a Placer County Republican who backs Giuliani, said he hopes the former mayor can "play better" in California because he is more politically moderate than many in his party. "I would vote for a standing rib roast over Hillary Clinton," McMurray added. "Really, I'm less of a Giuliani supporter than an anyone-but-Hillary."

By Peter Hecht, The Sacramento Bee, August 17, 2007

Two major Democratic presidential candidates - Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama - have vied for their party's nomination by trying to draw contrasts over experience and taking the country in a new direction. A new CBS News poll indicates that the distinction they are trying to make is sticking in the minds of voters. The Times's Katharine Q. Seelye takes a look at the results:

The poll suggests that voters are examining Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama, the two leading candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination, in much the same framework as their campaigns are presenting them, as a choice between change and experience. Voters are almost equally divided over which is more important, with 41 percent citing fresh ideas and 44 percent citing experience.

But, the survey also indicated that voters think Mrs. Clinton is "more qualified" and 'has a much better chance of becoming president."

Mr. Obama has been trying to capitalize on his fresh-thinking approach, hoping it will resonate with voters. Last night billionaire investor Warren Buffett held a fund-raiser for the Illinois senator in Omaha.

Mrs. Clinton, who is taking a brief break from the trail, mingled with Iowans at the state fair yesterday. The Time's Jodi Kantor observed that she looked "comfortable and perfectly pressed" despite the heat.

Six of the Democratic candidates took part in a forum organized by the Iowa Federation of Labor in Waterloo, Iowa. The Quad-City Times reports that the Democrats spoke about issues important to American workers and "stayed away from personal attacks." Former Senator John Edwards seemed to be sounding the right notes:

Edwards, who has been courting the union vote heavily, drew the loudest cheers of the day and chants of "Edwards, Edwards" in his closing remarks when he promised to walk picket lines as president of the United States.

The Times's Leslie Wayne notes that Mr. Edwards's campaign is diverting staff from Nevada to other early primary states. A campaign spokesman said "the shift should not be taken as an indication that Mr. Edwards was doing so well in Nevada that he could spare resources there, nor as a sign that he was pulling back from the state." Today New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, who came out with another television ad yesterday, will announce his plan "for the future of American jobs and the economy" at an event this afternoon in Cedar Rapids.

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney travels to three states today - West Virginia, South Carolina and New Hampshire. He campaigned in three other states yesterday - Michigan, Georgia and Florida. The Palm Beach Post reports that Mr. Romney continued to press his hard-line stance on illegal immigration. Though Mr. Romney did not mention his opponent by name, former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani was just miles away opening up his campaign office in Winter Park, Fla. Today Mr. Giuliani heads north to New Hampshire where he holds a town hall in Derry and events in three other towns. Arizona Senator John McCain spoke yesterday at the Aspen Institute in Colorado where he "shrugged off reports that his campaign is suffering both financially and in polls," according to the Aspen Times. Today Mr. McCain is scheduled to make several media appearances in connection with his new book, "Hard Call." He'll be a guest of Jon Stewart on Comedy Central's "The Daily Show" and talk to PBS's Charlie Rose and CNN's Larry King.

And, Washington Post columnist David S. Broder writes about his two-hour conversation with former Senator Fred D. Thompson. Mr. Broder offers this prediction:

When Fred Thompson makes his long-delayed entrance into the Republican presidential race, he will not tiptoe quietly. Instead, he will try to shake up the establishment candidates of both parties by depicting a nation in peril from fiscal and security threats - and prescribing tough cures that he says others shrink from offering.

By Michael Falcone, The New York Times, August 16, 2007

Clinton topped Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, 36% to 33%. North Carolina's John Edwards, the winner of the 2004 South Carolina Democratic primary who went on to be John Kerry's running mate, was third at 12%.

Thompson, an actor and former Tennessee senator, received 22% among Republicans, edging former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani at 18%. Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, was third at 17% and Arizona Sen. John McCain was fourth with 11%.

Both leads are statistically irrelevant because they fall within the survey's margin of error.

The poll reflected a turnaround on the Democratic side, an easing of support for Thompson as his announcement date remained unclear, a significant gain for Giuliani, and a further slide for former front-runner McCain, compared with PPP's June poll.

In the earlier survey, Obama led Clinton, 34-31, and Thompson had a double-digit lead, 27-16, over Romney. McCain was at 15% and Giuliani at 14%. Public Policy Polling is based in Raleigh, N.C.

Participants were 749 likely Republican primary voters and 437 likely Democratic primary voters with margins of error of 3.6 percentage points and 4.7 percentage points, respectively, said Justin Guillory, the firm's communications director.

But the Democratic element may have a statistical flaw. Only 40% of the respondents said they are black. The 2004 primary turnout was split nearly 50-50, black-white. The poll showed that 56% of the black participants said if the election was held that day, they would vote for Obama, the only black in the field, while 29% said they support Clinton. Among Republicans, 96% said they are white.

In the Democratic poll, Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson received 3% each and Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich, 1%. Twelve percent said they were undecided.
On the GOP side, 18% were undecided. Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee registered 7%, Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, 3%, Texas Rep. Ron Paul, 2% and Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo and California Rep. Duncan Hunter 1% each.

Also Wednesday, Clinton's campaign announced the endorsement of two current Charleston County Council members, Colleen Jordan and Teddie Pryor, and a former member, Cindy Floyd.

The bewilderingly shifting dates in next January's early presidential primaries may complicate the candidates' timing and tactics, but is it wreaking havoc in our American political system? I don't think so.

The frontloaded primary system is more frontloaded than ever, but as before, it will work to the advantage of the better-funded front-runners who emerge in January - with enough cash to finance the costly ad campaigns needed to run simultaneously in more than 20 states on the first Tuesday in February.

No one I have talked to on the Democratic or Republican sides of the aisle like the compressed, early nominating schedule that has emerged.

"The primary process is broken. It's a terrible mess. It really is not fair in the way the public gets to participate in the nominating process," said Leon Panetta, former White House chief of staff under President Clinton and a veteran Democratic party strategist.

In New Hampshire, whose early January primary date is still not settled, Democratic state chairman Ray Buckley blames his own party as well as the Republicans for what he calls a "chaotic" process. "As far as I am concerned, a pox on both parties. The Democrats kicked this off by establishing the frontloaded system, and the Republican party of Florida (moving its primary up to Jan. 29) and South Carolina (to January 19) has gleefully jumped into the mudpile," he complained to me. "I don't think it's good for the voters, but it's very clear that the Democrats' calendar changes last year and now the Republican National Committee this year has caused this. I guess we reap what we sow," he said.

If you're running in the second tier of candidates, struggling to become better known and get your message out, that is not a good thing, as Democratic Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico well knows. Mr. Richardson is hardly a household name, yet he has the best resume in his party: United Nations ambassador, energy secretary, member of Congress, a two-term governor who cut taxes, and an international troubleshooter who knows many of the world leaders on a first name basis.

But lesser-known candidates have overcome their name ID problem before. Colorado Sen. Gary Hart burst out of nowhere to beat former Vice President Walter Mondale in New Hampshire in 1984 and drove his under-funded campaign all the way to the convention. Mr. Romney, a one-term governor who has never held any other office, is still little known on the national stage. But he has outraised his Republican rivals in the race for money and has pushed himself into the lead in Iowa and New Hampshire. So David is still capable of fighting Goliath. Mr. Obama, a freshman senator without wealth or connections who was relatively little known nationally until this year, has propelled himself to the top of the heap of his party as a result of his inspiring oratorical skills and likeable personna. And has beaten Hillary Clinton in the fundraising race, too.

So the American political system is still wide open to anyone with pluck and perseverance who aspires to the presidency, no matter how chaotic the nominating system may appear to be.

By Donald Lambro, The Washington Times, August 16, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - More Republican Party supporters in the Granite State would vote for Mitt Romney in next year's United States presidential primary, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. 32 per cent of likely GOP voters in New Hampshire would back the former Massachusetts governor, up six points since June.

Former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani is second with 20 per cent, followed by actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson with 11 per cent, Arizona senator John McCain also with 11 per cent, and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee with three per cent.

In the sample of Democratic Party supporters, New York senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is first with 27 per cent, followed by Illinois senator Barack Obama with 22 per cent, former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 14 per cent, and New Mexico governor Bill Richardson with nine per cent. Support is lower for Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich and Delaware senator Joe Biden.

New Hampshire traditionally hosts the first presidential primary in the United States. Since 1952, 11 Republicans and eight Democrats have won the Granite State contest and later earned their party's presidential nomination. New Hampshire allows independent voters to take part in primaries.

In 2004, Massachusetts senator John Kerry won the Democratic New Hampshire primary with 38.4 per cent, followed by former Vermont governor Howard Dean with 26.3 per cent, retired general Wesley Clark with 12.4 per cent, and Edwards with 12.1 per cent. Incumbent president George W. Bush won the Republican primary without serious opposition.

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, August 16, 2007

The New York senator has a 20-point lead over second-place Barack Obama among registered Democrats responding to the latest CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll. Her edge over Obama rose an impressive 8 points after the Illinois senator appeared to be gaining on her earlier this summer.

But Clinton's steady lead in primary matchup polling has been well established. What's perhaps more telling is another CNN/ORC release from the same poll showing Clinton head and shoulders above Obama and third-place contender John Edwards on a number of key indicators. The results suggest Clinton's strategy of keeping one eye on the primary and another on the general may be appealing to primary voters hungry for a Democratic win after eight years of GOP rule.

Aware of the hurdles facing the first formidable woman candidate for president, Team Clinton has worked hard to position the former first lady as a viable war-time president. Clinton's recent criticism of Obama on matters of foreign policy and defense may be paying off. Forty-six percent of Democrats named Clinton "the most qualified to be commander in chief" in the CNN/ORC poll, putting her far ahead of Obama and Edwards. Another 47 percent said she'd be the "strongest leader."

Perhaps most challenging for Obama is the poll's revelation that a plurality of Democrats see Clinton, not her fresh-faced competitors, as the "change" candidate in this election. Four in 10 said Clinton would "bring needed change" to the country, compared with 27 percent naming Obama.

But while things are looking up for Clinton on the national stage, she's still got a tough road ahead in early primary states. For example, a recent ABC News/Washington Post poll showed Clinton, Obama and Edwards locked in a dead heat in Iowa. Perhaps recognizing the stiff competition there, Clinton launched her first TV ad in Iowa this week, casting herself as a woman of the people who will listen to those who have been ignored under the Bush administration -- a variation of the "change" theme that she hopes will catch on there.

But Clinton is not without her weak spots, according to the CNN/ORC poll. She's seen as less likable than Obama (31 percent to 34 percent) and only slightly more honest. The question is, in a time of war and disillusionment with Washington, will Democratic voters want to nominate someone they like, or someone they respect?

By Irene Tsikitas, National Journal, August 16, 2007

Looking at the next tier of candidates on the Republican side, Senator John McCain still leads the group with 14 percent saying they would vote for him followed by Mitt Romney at 11 percent and former Speaker Newt Gingrich at eight percent. One thing to note is that this survey was fielded right before the Ames Straw Poll which Governor Romney won, so any possible momentum would not be represented here. Governor Mike Huckabee, who placed a surprising second in Ames, is at two percent this month and it will be interesting to see if this changes next month.

These are some of the results of a Harris Poll of 2,870 U.S. adults surveyed online by Harris Interactive between August 3 and 10, 2007. This survey included 1,113 adults who expect to vote in a Democratic primary or caucus and 636 adults who expect to vote in a Republican primary or caucus. Like all polls conducted well before an election, this should not be read as a prediction. Rather, it is a snap shot of the presidential "horse race," at an early stage in the race.

Before being asked to pick their first choice in the primary elections, all adults surveyed were also shown a list of all the main candidates in both parties and some other well-known Republicans and Democrats, and asked which of them they would consider voting for. They could name as many people, in both parties, as they wished.

Among Democrats, more people say they would consider voting for Hillary Clinton (72%) than for Barack Obama (56%), and Obama only has a one point lead among Independents (36% versus 35%). Among Republicans, just over half say they would consider voting for Rudy Giuliani (55%) while 43 percent would consider Fred Thompson and 32 percent would consider John McCain. Giuliani also holds a small lead among Independents (22% to 19% for McCain and 18% for Thompson). Just one in ten (10%) would consider voting for Michael Bloomberg, NYC Mayor, for President.

When the replies of all adults are taken together, 69 percent would consider voting for one of the Democrats and 56 percent would consider voting for one of the Republican leaders. While almost all Democrats and Republicans (93% for both parties) would consider one of the leaders from their own party, the Independents are leaning more Democrat. Seven in ten (70%) of Independents would consider one of the Democratic leaders while just over half (53%) would consider one of the Republican leaders.

Harris Interactive, August 16, 2007

"The movement is glacial, but for Sen. Hillary Clinton, it's in the right direction," said Maurice Carroll, director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

Clinton held a 46-43 percent advantage over the former New York City mayor among likely voters in the national poll of 1,545 voters that was conducted between Aug. 7 and 13. The poll also found that Clinton is well ahead of her Democratic rivals for the party's nomination.

The New York senator was favored by 36 percent of Democrats polled. Illinois Sen. Barack Obama was favored by 21 percent. And, non-candidate Al Gore was backed by 15 percent.

"At the moment, it really is a one-person race," Carroll said.

However, he cautioned that Clinton could stumble because her unfavorable ratings are the highest of any top presidential contender at 43 percent. "The 'Hillary hostility' factor is constant and feeds doubts about whether she can win in November 2008," Carroll said. "That polling perennial - her unfavorability factor - remains high." Meanwhile, Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd remains an asterisk in the latest poll - registering less than 1 percent of support among the field of Democratic contenders. "Like Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, Dodd makes a good impression. They look as if they belong on the stage but they don't have the votes," Carroll said.

Colleen Flanagan, a spokeswoman for Dodd's presidential campaign, said the poll numbers are meaningless this far in advance of the first primaries and caucuses. "We still have five months to go and it is the dead of summer," she said. "We're quite confident that when people start looking at issues that matter the most to them - ending the war in Iraq, a truly universal health care plan, an education plan to allow all Americans to go to community college for free, and a national service plan - people will realize that Chris Dodd is the best leader to have in the White House."

Among other findings, Carroll noted that Clinton enjoys strong support among the less affluent and less educated Democrats while Obama has the support of wealthy, college-educated Democrats. Among college-educated Democrats, Obama led Clinton 29-27 percent while non-college educated Democrats favored Clinton over Obama, 40-19 percent. Among Democrats earning more than $100,000, Obama led Clinton, 33-27 percent while Democrats earning less than $30,000 favored Clinton over Obama, 42-19 percent. "Obama can have the college faculty lounges and Hollywood. She's getting the blue collar which is the bulk of the party," Carroll said.

Among Republicans polled, Giuliani was favored by 28 percent followed by former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who was favored by 15 percent.

The survey of 1,545 voters has a margin of error of 2.5 percent, including 611 Republicans with a margin of error of 4.0 percent, and 717 Democrats with a margin of error of 3.7 percent.

By Peter Urban, The Connecticut Post, August 15, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton is the most popular United States presidential contender in the Sunshine State, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. At least 49 per cent of respondents in Florida would vote for the New York senator in head-to-head contests against four prospective Republican nominees.

Rodham Clinton holds a five-point edge over former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, a 13-point lead over actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson, a 14-point advantage over Arizona senator John McCain, and a 22-point lead over former Massachusetts governor Mitt 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, August 15, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Hillary Rodham Clinton is holding on to the top position in the race for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. 43 per cent of respondents would support the New York senator in a 2008 primary.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 23 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 12 per cent, and New Mexico governor Bill Richardson with four per cent.

On Aug. 8, Richardson discussed his views on global commerce, saying, "America should never have a trade agreement unless it protects labour. What we need to do from now on is say, no child labour, no slave labour. We need to make sure there is freedom of association, collective bargaining, and we need to make sure that wage disparity doesn't exist."

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, August 14, 2007

Current national polls show both Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani with solid leads for their respective party's nominations. Clinton holds about a 20% lead over Barack Obama in national polls, and is rated by London odds-makers a near 60% probability to be nominated. Obama has faded a bit as a serious contender despite his early fund-raising success, following a series of what appeared to many to be naive and contradictory statements on foreign policy issues.

In head-to-head polls for the general election, Giuliani runs better than any other Republican against possible Democratic nominees (McCain runs second best, and Romney the weakest ) and he and Hillary are approximately tied when they are paired in the polls. Rudy's national strength as a candidate is one reason why liberal media outlets such as the New York Times and Washington Post have started to rough him up a bit. In the case of the Times, Giuliani weathered this for 8 years as mayor, so it is nothing new. The Senate duel between Hillary and Rudy in New York that never happened in 2000 due to Giuliani's prostate cancer may instead play out on a far bigger stage next year.

John Edwards, who has almost no chance to be the nominee for the Democrats, and has gone the farthest in pandering to the left wing activist base of the Democratic Party in an attempt to gain some media attention and traction against his celebrity opponents for the nomination, runs better in head-to-head races against the GOP candidates than either Hillary or Obama. Could it be that a white male is a safer bet than a woman or African-American for the Democrats?

The 2008 Presidential contest is shaping up to be similar to the 2000 and 2004 races. Those two races had very similar red - blue maps. In 2000, Bush won 30 states (including all the states in the South), and in 2004 Bush won 31 states. He picked up Iowa and New Mexico in 2004, in each case winning by less than 10,000 votes, after losing both states by similar narrow margins in 2000, and Bush lost New Hampshire in 2004, after narrowly winning the state in 2000. This was similar to the pattern in the 1992 and 1996 races, when but 5 states changed from one election to the next (Clinton gaining Florida and Arizona in 1996, and losing Colorado, Montana and Georgia that year). Clinton won 32 states in 1992 and 31 in 1996. The big shift was from 1996 to 2000, when the GOP picked up 11 states it had lost in 1996: Ohio, West Virginia, New Hampshire, Florida, Arkansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Tennessee, Kentucky, Nevada and Arizona.

Looking at the map for 2008, Giuliani would bring strength to the GOP in the northeast (where it is now weakest), and maybe the Midwest region among suburban voters, and would likely run weaker than Bush did in the South (where the Party has been the strongest) and Southwest. In 2004, Bush won Iowa, New Mexico, Nevada and Ohio by less than 3%, and Florida and Colorado by 5%. All six states will be very competitive in 2008. John Kerry won New Hampshire, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania by less than 3%, and Michigan, Minnesota and Oregon by 3 to 4%. All six states are likely to be competitive, with the possible exception of New Hampshire, which is trending Democratic. Giuliani probably puts New Jersey and its 15 Electoral votes in play. On the other side, Virginia (13) and Arkansas (6) are the most winnable Southern states for the Democrats (other than Florida), and Missouri will likely be a close race as well (Bush won by 7% in 2004).

As in 2000 and 2004, the election race is likely to be played out in about a dozen states, at most probably 15-16. Each party starts with similar numbers of seemingly safe Electoral College votes (183 by my count for the GOP, and 167-171 for the Democrats, depending on whether New Hampshire is still competitive).

This is where the VP selection can matter to each party. The Democrats can improve their chances in one or two states by selecting a Southerner for the number two spot. In particular, Mark Warner could be a big help in winning Virginia. While the Democrats won the Governor's race and the Senate race in Virginia the last two years, in the 2004 Presidential race, Bush carried the state by 9%. Governor Phil Bredesen might make Tennessee more competitive but native son (of sorts) Al Gore could not win the state as the Presidential nominee in 2000.

If Senator Bill Nelson of Florida were the number two pick for the Democrats, that would improve the Party's chances of winning the state's 27 Electoral College votes. Bush won Florida by 5% in 2004, and in an otherwise bad year for the Republicans, Charlie Crist won the open seat Governor's race by 7% in 2006. The GOP starts out as the favorite in both Virginia and Florida in 2008.

On the GOP side, assuming the nominee is Rudy Giuliani, he could improve his appeal to social conservatives and Southerners by picking for his VP nominee a candidate such as Mike Huckabee of Arkansas. That would likely secure that state's 6 Electoral votes, and might enhance his margin in other Southern states as well. But the GOP nominee will be favored in all the Southern states to begin with.

A more strategic choice might be to pick Governoe Tim Pawlenty of Minnesotaa, who survived a re-election race last year when his party lost badly in the state's other races. Pawlenty could help Rudy in Minnesota and Wisconsin, which Bush lost by a very small margin in 2000 and 2004, and also in Iowa, which leaned to the Democrats in the 2006 election. The GOP has scheduled its nominating convention for the Twin Cities, suggesting a push for the Upper Midwest.

Another possible number two pick could be a Midwestern congressman, such as Mike Pence of Indiana, or Rob Portman, the current US Trade representative and former Ohio Congressman, who might help the ticket in Ohio, which might be the toughest state for the GOP to hold in 2008, after the Republicans were routed in all statewide races in 2006.

There are of course potential wildcard nominees on both sides. If Hillary were nominated, she could pick Obama. But I think having two national ticket nominees who were first-of-a-kind may be too much of a risk for the Party, especially since both Hillary and Obama have appeal to the same groups. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, on the other hand, would help the Party in the very competitive heavily Hispanic western states of New Mexico (42%), Colorado (17%) and Nevada (20%), but a series of questions about his truthfulness have not helped his case.

On the GOP side, the Party could make a wild card pick of someone like Mel Martinez, the Florida Senator, to also make a pitch for Hispanic votes. Martinez is Cuban, which may have less broad appeal to Hispanics in the West. The GOP could also pick Michael Steele of Maryland or Ken Blackwell of Ohio, African-Americans who lost statewide races in 2006. If the GOP were to increase its share of the African-American vote from 10% to 20% from such a selection, it could improve the GOP's chances in several close states with significant African-American population, such as Ohio (11%), Pennsylvania (10%), New Jersey (13%), Michigan (14%) and Florida (14%).

It seems likely, though not certain at this point, that the Democrats will hold control of both the House and Senate after the 2008 elections, and could enlarge their majority, especially in the Senate. The Presidency, however, is very much up for grabs, and with it the President's potential ability to appoint a few Supreme Court justices in the next few years. I think we are headed for a fierce, bitter, extraordinarily expensive fight ahead.

By Richard Baehr, RealClearPolitics, August 14, 2007

Potential Democratic primary voters see Sen. Hillary Clinton as more experienced and a stronger leader than her major rivals for the 2008 Democratic nomination, according to a poll released Monday.

However, Clinton did not score as high when registered Democrats were asked which of the candidates is the most likable and the most honest, the poll showed. And a quarter of those polled don't think she can beat the Republican standard-bearer in the general election if she gets her party's nod.

Asked which of the candidates in the race has the best experience to be president, Clinton was the choice of 59 percent, compared to 11 percent for former Sen. John Edwards and just 9 percent for Sen. Barack Obama, who is now running second to Clinton in national polls. The poll's sampling error was plus or minus 5 percentage points.

When asked to pick the strongest leader, Clinton again scored far ahead of her rivals, at 47 percent, compared with 22 percent for Obama and 13 percent for Edwards.

She also came out on top when voters were asked who is most qualified to be commander-in-chief, with 46 percent saying Clinton, 15 percent Obama and 13 percent Edwards.

Despite Obama's concerted efforts to portray himself as the agent of change, 40 percent of poll respondents thought Clinton is the candidate most likely to bring change, compared with 27 percent for Obama and 15 percent for Edwards.

However, the poll found Clinton and Obama are neck-and-neck when it comes to which candidate is the most likable, with 34 percent picking Obama and 31 percent Clinton. Edwards was at 19 percent.

As far as who is the most honest, 28 percent said Clinton, 24 percent picked Obama and 19 percent chose Edwards.

Asked which candidate has the best chance of winning the November 2008 general election, 55 percent said Clinton, putting her well ahead of Obama, at 19 percent, and Edwards, at 12 percent.

When asked whether Clinton can beat the GOP nominee, 72 percent of registered Democrats said yes, while 25 percent said no. However, she scored higher on that question than Obama. Only 57 percent of registered Democrats think he can beat the Republican nominee, while 37 percent don't.

Many Republicans are convinced Clinton would be vulnerable in a general election, with too much political baggage to be electable. Her unfavorable rating in polls has hovered around 44 percent throughout the year, an uncomfortably high number for any candidate.

However, the average of five recent polls pitting Clinton against the current Republican front-runner, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, showed Clinton slightly ahead, at 46 percent to 44 percent.

By CNN, August 13, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - More Democratic Party supporters in the United States believe Hillary Rodham Clinton should become their presidential nominee in 2008, according to a poll by Opinion Research Corporation released by CNN. 40 per cent of respondents would back the New York senator in a 2008 primary, up five points since June.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 21 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 13 per cent, and former U.S. vice-president Al Gore with 11 per cent. Support is lower for New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, Delaware senator Joe Biden, and Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich.

Earlier this month, Biden discussed his chances, saying, "I promise you, I don't want to be secretary of state. If I did, this is certainly not the best way to go about it. I'm going to be taking sharper and sharper exceptions with my colleagues. And it won't be easy to then turn around and ask to be secretary of state. The truth is, I will be upset only if I don't say what I think during this campaign."

Thompson is the first casualty of Saturday's Straw Polll. He had pledged to leave the race if he didn't finish first or second in the non-binding vote, which is seen as the first serious test of the 2008 Republican race.

Thompson served four terms as governor of Wisconsin and was also secretary of Health and Human Services during the Bush administration's first term. Despite spending considerable time in Iowa in the run-up to Saturday's vote, Thompson was never able to build any real momentum -- a lack of movement confirmed by his sixth-place finish in Ames.

His departure has little to no impact on the race. Voters wanting a Thompson in the race need only wait until next month when former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson is expected to announce his presidential candidacy.

He charms elites. But how does Obama woo a must-have: 'downscale Dems'?

Which is exactly what Clinton wants. As the first serious female contender for president, she is hardly the natural choice for socially conservative, blue-collar Democrats. But because "they're less critical and less informed than upscale voters, they're more inclined to go with the mainstream candidate, at least early on," says Teixeira. Clinton is working hard to solidify her head start among the beer-track types who powered her husband's "Comeback Kid" performance in the 1992 New Hampshire primary (and eventually won him the White House). Consider her oft-repeated line about being "born into a middle class family in the middle of America in the middle of the last century." "It's a class appeal," says Penn's Kathleen Hall Jamieson, author of "Packaging the Presidency." "It's a move away from First Lady, from Ivy League graduate."

Obama, in contrast, "can be poetic, even cerebral," says Jamieson-and the Clinton camp is quick to agree. In a 10-minute interview with NEWSWEEK, Clinton strategist Mark Penn mentioned arugula three times. "It symbolizes his appeal to elites," says Penn, who also noted that Obama's first Iowa ad featured Harvard Law professor Larry Tribe.

Obama's team is undeterred. By most accounts, its candidate is better positioned than his predecessors to overcome the wine-track curse. "He started his career on the South Side of Chicago," says spokeswoman Candice Tolliver. "No one needs to prime him." His ace in the hole? Race. Even though polls show that blacks still have doubts about Obama, he weathered similar skepticism in the 2004 Illinois Senate primary before winning nearly all of their votes. "He soared with elites initially," says Mark Blumenthal, who polled for Obama's chief rival. "But it took until the last week of the campaign for blacks to decide." If they break his way again, says Blumenthal, Obama could ride a new black-upscale majority to the nomination. For early indicators, staffers are watching low-income, largely black South Carolina where, from April 1 to June 30, the campaign spent $480,000-four times Clinton's investment-to hire staff, stage rallies, organize house meetings and place ads on gospel and R&B radio. The result: an electorate that's more familiar with Obama-and polls that show a dead heat. "We have to do more to reach low-income voters," says South Carolina spokesman Kevin Griffis. But strong numbers heading into the Jan. 29 primary would bode well for Obama's beer-track appeal-if he can steer clear of the fancy lettuce.

National security stance seen adding image of strength

Clinton has taken extraordinary pains, not only on the campaign trail but in her years in the US Senate, to position herself as the candidate who would be the strongest commander in chief, even as she has infuriated some Democrats who believe her desire to appear tough made her slow to criticize the Iraq war.

Because she is a Democrat and the first serious female contender for the presidency in a time of war, convincing voters that she can be trusted with the nation's security is one of her biggest hurdles.

The New York senator seems to have won this trust, helping her jump to the front of the Democratic pack.

In several national polls and in Iowa, the first caucus state, she is the Democrat who most likely primary voters say is the "strongest leader," a term generally seen as encompassing defense know-how. And a New York Times/CBS News poll of Republicans as well as Democrats last month found that 58 percent of respondents thought it was somewhat or very likely that she would be an effective commander in chief.

Clinton came into the campaign with some advantages in foreign policy, including eight years of globe-hopping and meetings with world leaders as the wife of a president. But the extent to which she is seen among voters as a credible commander in chief has surprised many campaign observers, given how much other women in American politics have struggled to be taken seriously on military and foreign policy issues.

"It is amazing to many of us, in a year where being commander in chief is the most important issue, that the sole woman is actually the only one who has managed to come across as a strong commander in chief," said Elaine Kamarck, a lecturer at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government who worked in the Clinton White House and advised Al Gore's presidential campaign in 2000, but has not decided whom to support in the 2008 race.

Added Daron Shaw, a political scientist at the University of Texas in Austin and a former campaign strategist for President Bush, "She's come off as credible and serious on national defense -- an issue that two years ago most of us would have thought would be a liability for her."

"But you can't do that with Hillary Clinton," said Ferraro, who is backing Clinton, citing the senator's greater experience. "Hillary is in a totally different place." Society has changed, but Clinton has also been tending carefully to her defense bona fides since she was elected to the Senate in 2000, mindful not only of her gender but how much the "draft dodger" label hurt her husband in his campaigns.

She worked hard to get a seat on the powerful Armed Services Committee, which deals with most defense issues. She has advocated for better health benefits and higher pay for the military, and even free postage for families to mail packages to loved ones serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. And she has sought private briefings with military leaders and has grown friendly with several high-profile retired generals.

"My former colleagues, retired flag officers, whom I've set up to meet with her, come back and say, 'Wow, she listens to what we have to say more than any other senator,' " said Donald L. Kerrick, a retired general and former deputy national security adviser to President Clinton. Kerrick helps organize meetings of retired officers to advise Hillary Clinton's campaign.

In addition to working with fellow Democrats to pressure the Bush administration to end the war in Iraq, Clinton has taken stands less popular with liberals, cosponsoring a bill to expand the Army by 100,000 soldiers and supporting new spending on missile defense. She has traveled to Iraq and Afghanistan three times to meet the troops and talk to commanders and Iraqi leaders.

"She engaged in a very serious effort to educate herself on national security matters," said Andrew J. Bacevich, a Boston University international relations professor and Vietnam veteran. "She has prepared herself very conscientiously for the office." But Bacevich, who spoke out against the Iraq war long before his soldier son was killed by a bomb there in May, said that knowledge and preparation are distinct from wisdom and judgment. Clinton's 2002 vote to authorize the Iraq war -- heavily criticized by her opponents and liberal bloggers -- "is a small but damning piece of evidence" about her wisdom, he said.

Yet Clinton is doing surprisingly well among antiwar Democrats, leading Senator Barack Obama 51 percent to 29 percent among those who want an immediate withdrawal from Iraq -- which isn't even her position -- according to a Washington Post/ABC poll last month.

And even as Clinton attacks the Bush administration for neglecting diplomacy, she often makes tough comments that sound a lot like the president. At one debate, she spoke of the need to retaliate against terrorists and said the United States should "destroy" Osama bin Laden.

She frequently recalls the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, and defended the idea of a "war on terror" when another Democratic hopeful, former senator John Edwards, likened the term to a bumper sticker slogan.

While many voters view Clinton as cold and calculating, those very characteristics help her come off as a plausible leader of the armed forces, some analysts say. Some see in her a bit of Margaret Thatcher, the former British prime minister known as the "Iron Lady," and distinguish Clinton from Patricia Schroeder, the Democratic congresswoman from Colorado who was ridiculed for tearing up when she announced she would not run for president in 1988.

"A lot of things that people thought were her weaknesses are turning out to be her strengths on this issue -- the fact that she is not warm and cuddly," Kamarck said. Schroeder, who supports Clinton, said that women in politics still have to "leap through 14 hoops" to be taken as seriously as men, but that Clinton has accomplished that. "You couldn't play it any better," she said.

Still, some voters would never accept her as their commander in chief. "She doesn't have much experience," said Jim Golden of Farmington, N.H., commander of a Veterans of Foreign Wars post in Rochester. "I don't think sex has anything to do with it." Golden, who spent 22 years in the Marines including three tours in Vietnam, is an undecided Republican leaning toward Senator John McCain, a decorated Vietnam veteran and former prisoner of war. Republican National Committee spokeswoman Amber Wilkerson said Clinton's "problem is not her gender so much as the fact that she's taken a page from John Kerry's failed presidential campaign." "First she was for the war and said she rejected setting a timetable to withdraw from Iraq," Wilkerson said in a statement. "Now she's not only calling for an arbitrary deadline, but she also was one of 14 senators who voted to cut off funding for our men and women still fighting in harm's way."

Today's military, however, is more open-minded than outsiders realize, particularly given the strain of the war, said Daniel W. Christman, a retired general and former West Point superintendent advising Clinton's campaign. "Given the experiences of the last 6 1/2 years," Christman said, "one thing I have perceived in the officer corps, at least in the Army, is that what had been an almost reflexive conservative or Republican bias has shifted."

By Marcella Bombardieri, The Boston Globe, August 12, 2007

WELL, a New York political reporter can dream, can't he?

Yes, Fred Thompson is getting ready to run. Sure, Mitt Romney has loads of money. O.K., Barack Obama can make cynical Democrats swoon. Yet as confounding as it may be, polls regularly show that two New Yorkers may end up as the Democratic and Republican presidential candidates in 2008 - Hillary Rodham Clinton and Rudolph W. Giuliani.

Mrs. Clinton's performance in the televised debates, her projection of presidential gravitas and her widely known name have helped her build a lead over her rivals. On the Republican side, Mr. Giuliani continues to engage voters as the white knight of 9/11, and he has shown steadiness as some of his rivals have stumbled.

So let's dream a little. What would the race look like?

It would be personal, pitting opponents with deep history from their home base who nearly faced off for the Senate seat Mrs. Clinton won in 2000. Both have killer instincts, and each has an archive of opposition research on the other. They may not despise each other, their advisers say. But despite the need to remain presidential, they would, in the end, drive each other batty.

"Hillary and Rudy would pursue a similar strategy: Do things to taunt the other to get them to lose their temper," said Kenneth Sherrill, a political scientist at Hunter College in New York who has followed both politicians closely. "He would push allegations of ethical impropriety in the Clinton White House and try to link her to all the old Clinton scandals," Mr. Sherrill said. "And she could go after him on cronyism, on the excesses of his mayoralty, on his relationships with people like Bernie Kerik" (the disgraced former New York City police commissioner). You can imagine the biting sarcasm - the way Mr. Giuliani would sneeringly refer to Mrs. Clinton as "her," the way she would dress him down as "the mayor." And oh, the catty asides from Bill Clinton and Judith Giuliani!

The New York tabloids would pursue their prey with extra zest. Every move by the candidates' spouses would be scrutinized. Ditto for their entire families. You can imagine The New York Post watching to see if Chelsea Clinton pulls off an October surprise by making a secret mission to Cambridge to persuade the Harvard sophomore Caroline Giuliani to endorse the Democratic mama over the Republican papa. "Mom would even let you hold the Dunster House senior party in the Map Room!" Ms. Clinton might say.

For sure, Mr. Giuliani and Mrs. Clinton would try to outdo each other on the security issue. He would push her to prove that a woman could be tough enough as commander in chief. You could imagine dueling news conferences near Ground Zero, she with chronically ill firefighters from the pile, he with police officers and widows - and his archnemesis, Wayne Barrett of The Village Voice, shouting questions about why the mayor put the city's emergency command center at the World Trade Center, of all places.

Mr. Giuliani might have to tone down his pugilistic style. "Rudy and she will get personal, and he's going to have to be very careful that he not seem like he's the mean guy making her a victim," said Ed Rollins, the Republican strategist. "He has to calibrate it just the right way so she continues to engage him, rather than paint him as hot-tempered."

Mrs. Clinton may come off as the student government president, at peace with Robert's Rules of Order. But she likes it when the battle is joined, and Mr. Giuliani might push her to show that she would fight back as president, that she would never allow herself to be Swift-boated. "My sense is she won't get to be quite the lady she's been," Mr. Rollins said. "She will not take his attacks lightly."

Especially given the singular political threat Mr. Giuliani could pose. With his relatively moderate stances on abortion rights and gay civil unions, Mr. Giuliani might win over enough independents and undecided Democrats to be competitive in usually reliable Democratic states like New Jersey. And he would have a head start in key battlegrounds like Ohio. Mr. Giuliani's appeal could push Mrs. Clinton to run harder to the left than she would prefer, to keep security moms and abortion rights supporters firmly at her side. And she might have to recalculate her thinking on a running mate.

To keep New Jersey safely blue, might she tap her friend Gov. Jon Corzine, whose liberalism might also help her on the left? Or to make a real run at Florida, might she pick that state's senior senator, Bill Nelson? Some Democrats close to Mrs. Clinton predict a Midwesterner or Southerner as her No. 2. (While Mr. Giuliani would give her a race in California, they think she would prevail.) These Democrats see her picking former Gov. Mark Warner of Virginia, former Gov. Tom Vilsack of Iowa, Gov. Phil Bredesen of Tennessee, or - lest we forget - Senator Barack Obama.

But for all the heartburn Mr. Giuliani might cause Mrs. Clinton, he could not count on her unpopularity with the right to improve his own uneven standing among conservatives. He might need a running mate who is more pleasing to the right than he is. One interesting choice might be Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas. This would shore up Arkansas's emergence as a breeding ground for national leaders.

But Arkansas would have nothing on New York if not one, or two, but three New Yorkers ended up in the general election - the third being Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, who seems to be flirting with an independent candidacy. His advisers said a Clinton-Giuliani match-up could make him more likely to run. He believes that he has exceeded Mr. Giuliani as mayor and that he has much more executive experience than Mrs. Clinton has. And with two New Yorkers already in the race, the Bloomberg camp thinks that Americans might be more amused than ambivalent about seeing another added to the mix.

Three's company, no?

By Patrick Healy, The New York Times, August 12, 2007

There was a time when running for president of the United States meant visiting with voters in New Hampshire living rooms, eating your way across the Iowa State Fair, delivering speeches and raising money.

In this Summer of Debates, Democrats appeared before bloggers in Chicago last Saturday, union members in Chicago on Tuesday and gay leaders in Los Angeles on Thursday. The Republicans, with fewer organized interest groups and thus fewer such demands, debated here in Des Moines last Sunday morning. The Democrats will be back here a week from this Sunday for another bright-and-early debate. The night before, there is a labor forum in Cedar Rapids, a two-hour drive away. And there is also a labor forum this Wednesday afternoon in Waterloo.

For those who remember the effort by the Democratic national chairman, Howard Dean, to limit the number of debates - at the request of candidates who find them time-consuming and not particularly profitable - news flash: it failed. And to what end?

For lesser-known candidates eager for attention, sharing a stage with better-financed and well-known contenders is the one and perhaps only way of getting a high-profile moment. That was clear watching Representative Tom Tancredo, Republican of Colorado, begging George Stephanopoulos, the moderator of the Republican debate on ABC last Sunday, for a moment of air time.

Further, these forums, which often bring some very unexpected and provocative questions, are good spring training for whoever ends up in the general election debates next fall. But it is debatable, so to speak, whether very many voters are really paying close attention to all this talk, much less whether they will remember much of it when it comes time to vote early next year.

And there are risks - particularly for the Democrats, summoned to appear before, and appease, groups pressing them to stake out early positions on the left over gay rights, health care, the empowering of labor unions and the war in Iraq. At the labor debate in Chicago on Tuesday, the candidates seemed at times to be competing with one another in offering promises that might satisfy union members: raising the minimum wage, supporting expanded health benefits, opposing trade deals with China. (There is less of a problem for Republicans, as a number of Democratic campaign aides said in the course of grousing interviews. When, asked one, was the last time the National Rifle Association commanded Republican presidential candidates to appear in a nationally televised debate on Second Amendment issues?)

Democrats got a reminder of how these events can expose them to political fire when they attended the YearlyKos convention of bloggers last week. Seeking to portray the Democrats as way left of the mainstream, given their acceptance of the invitation, the Republican National Committee gleefully celebrated their arrival by releasing a videotape that linked them to some of the more controversial utterances of the Daily Kos blog's founder, Markos Moulitsas. "It was shooting fish in a barrel," said Tracey Schmitt, the committee's press secretary.

was maneuvered into offering a defense of lobbyists: "A lot of those lobbyists, whether you like it or not, represent real Americans." The remark had her own supporters grimacing and girding for its possible use in rivals' campaign advertisements.While these repeated forums can provide voters information about the presidential hopefuls - and force the candidates to bone up on the issues - they also provide a platform for candidates to make mistakes. In one notable moment before the bloggers, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton And the larger the number of debates, the greater the chance of saying something, or taking a position, that could cause problems down the road, especially in this YouTube age.

"It's important for candidates to keep their eye on the prize: their job is not simply to win the room, it is to win the country," said Bruce Reed, president of the centrist Democratic Leadership Council. "So far I don't see much sign of candidates' going in front of groups and changing positions to suit the audience. But that's the real danger."

For all that, what has been striking this year is the extent to which Democrats are more confident about appearing at forums of liberal interest groups than they would have been four or eight years ago. It reflects a party that seems secure in its political standing, and just how much the political landscape has changed since President Bush was re-elected.

By Adam Nagourney, The New York Times, August 11, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Mitt Romney is most popular United States presidential hopeful for Republican Party supporters in the Hawkeye State, according to a poll by the University of Iowa. 26.9 per cent of likely GOP caucus voters would back the former Massachusetts governor in 2008.

Former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani is second with 11.3 per cent, followed by actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson with 6.5 per cent. Support is lower for Kansas senator Sam Brownback, Colorado congressman Tom Tancredo, Arizona senator John McCain, and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee.

In the sample of Democratic Party supporters, New York senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is first with 26.8 per cent, followed by Illinois senator Barack Obama with 22.3 per cent, former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 22.1 per cent, and New Mexico governor Bill Richardson with 8.5 per cent.

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.

The Republican Party will hold an unofficial straw poll of candidates in Iowa today, before the actual caucus in 2008. Giuliani and McCain will not participate, and former Wisconsin governor Tommy Thompson has said he would drop out of the presidential race if he doesn't come in "first or second."

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, August 11, 2007

A newly released poll of New Hampshire primary voters shows Hillary Clinton leading the Democratic field and Mitt Romney ahead on the Republican side.

In the survey, 36 percent of likely Democratic primary voters said they were most likely to support Clinton, compared to 19 percent for Barack Obama, 15 percent for John Edwards, and 12 percent for Bill Richardson. Four other candidates were supported by a total of 5 percent, and 13 percent of respondents said they were undecided.

Among Republicans, Romney led with 33 percent, Rudy Giuliani had 17 percent, John McCain 16 percent, and Fred Thompson 13 percent. Six others shared 9 percent, and 12 percent of respondents said they were undecided.

The poll of 504 Democrats and 500 Republicans was conducted between July 24 and July 26 by Peter D. Hart Research Associates, a Democratic polling firm, and McLaughlin and Associates, a Republican polling firm. It was commissioned by ONE, a nonpartisan coalition that is seeking to push candidates to address global poverty and health.

In the poll, 86 percent of Democratic voters and 67 percent of Republicans said presidential candidates should incorporate their proposals to deal with global hunger and poverty in their foreign policy platforms. Also, 81 percent of Democrats and 80 percent of Republicans said the next president should keep President Bush's commitments to fight AIDS in Africa.

"This election is an opportunity to ensure that our next president is committed to ending extreme poverty in the world's poorest countries," Susan McCue, ONE president and CEO, said in a statement. "We can finally put an end to preventable diseases like malaria and live up to our nation's tradition of compassion and leadership around the world. The ONE poll shows that voters are ready to mobilize behind a candidate who takes on global poverty, hunger, and health."

By Foon Rhee, The Boston Globe, August 11, 2007

As Nominating Calendar Shifts, Culver Says Caucuses Will Stay in 2008

The first-term governor's decision helped short-circuit speculation about the possibility of a December start to the nomination process, while leaving open questions about the timing of the earliest primaries and caucuses and possible sanctions by the national party committees for states that violate their rules. Even if Iowa holds its caucuses in January, the 2008 calendar will be the earliest and most heavily front-loaded in the history of presidential politics. At this point at least five states are scheduled to hold contests in January, and many more will follow on Feb. 5 -- what will be the biggest single primary day ever in terms of delegates awarded.

After the South Carolina announcement on Thursday, politicians here in Iowa openly speculated that the state's precinct caucuses could be held on Dec. 10 or Dec. 17 to preserve their traditional status as the kickoff to the nominating process. Culver moved quickly to take those options off the table and said his state will work with New Hampshire as well as state and national parties to resolve the uncertainty about the calendar. But he said he had concluded that it "makes no sense" to allow the first voting of the 2008 campaign to begin before this year's holiday season -- either from the standpoint of Iowa voters or for the good of the overall process.

The governor also said he hoped to put a few days between the Christmas-New Year's Day holiday week and the caucuses. Other Iowans said that could mean caucuses on Jan. 5, a Saturday rather than their traditional Monday.

Still, the nominating calendar remains in flux. South Carolina Republicans shifted their primary from Feb. 2 to Jan. 19 to preserve that state's tradition of holding the first GOP primary in the South, a status threatened by Florida's earlier decision to set its primary on Jan. 29. South Carolina Democratic Party Chairwoman Carol Fowler said she has no plans to move her party's primary. The Democratic National Committee has threatened to penalize any states that move their contests earlier than currently authorized. Florida faces such sanctions, which include the threat of not having its delegation seated at the national nominating convention.

Many see New Hampshire as holding the key to the future. Secretary of State Bill Gardner has sole power in the state to establish the dates for the Democratic and Republican primaries, and he is a fierce defender of a tradition that has seen Iowa hold the first caucuses and the Granite State conduct the first primary. New Hampshire law requires the state to set its primary at least seven days before a similar contest elsewhere. Given South Carolina's move, that would mean Jan. 12 -- a Saturday -- at the latest. Gardner said in an interview Thursday that he does not want to push Iowa's vote into December, and he made it clear that he has new flexibility from the legislature to hold his state's primary on a day other than Tuesday, its traditional spot. New Hampshire elected officials are hopeful that Gardner will avoid any moves that provoke further disillusionment with the nominating calendar.

Iowa law requires the state's caucuses to be held at least eight days before any other event. Culver, however, said Friday that he is prepared to do "whatever it takes" to reach a satisfactory solution. Other states figure into the discussions, however. The DNC authorized Nevada to hold the second caucuses of the year, on Jan. 19, and called for Nevada to vote after Iowa and before New Hampshire. That order would be jeopardized if New Hampshire moves earlier in the month. Jamal Simmons, a spokesman for the Nevada Democratic Party, said that, so far, the state is holding to Jan. 19.

Michigan also is threatening to move its primary. Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.) has long objected to what he sees as the privileged positions of Iowa and New Hampshire, and he forced the creation of the DNC commission that came up with the rules for 2008. Gardner is particularly concerned about any Michigan moves that would threaten his state's status.

Culver said Iowa and New Hampshire officials are in discussions to find a way to resolve the calendar questions, and he expressed hope that the national committee will sign off. "We'd rather not have to kind of reinvent the wheel here," he said. "Let's work with New Hampshire, let's work with the national parties and kind of get this finalized as soon as we can."

By Dan Balz, The Washington Post, August 11, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Hillary Rodham Clinton remains the national frontrunner in the race for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination in the United States, according to a poll by Gallup released by USA Today. 42 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in a 2008 primary, up eight points since mid-July.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 19 per cent, followed by former U.S. vice-president Al Gore with 18 per cent, and former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 10 per cent. Support is lower for New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, Delaware senator Joe Biden, and Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich.

On Aug. 8, Gore ruled out seeking the presidency next year, adding, "I may re-enter politics at some point in the future because I'm only 59 years old. (...) There is no single candidate that is putting forward a comprehensive argument about the environment or making climate change a priority. I will continue to work so that public opinion will push all candidates to make climate a priority."

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, August 11, 2007

Clinton, who picked up the endorsement Friday of San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, toured the construction site of a touted "sustainable" new home for the California Academy of Sciences in Golden Gate Park.

After touring the facility's green innovations, including insulation made from recycled blue jeans and a 2.5-acre "living roof" of hundreds of native California plants, the New York senator accused the Bush administration of obstructing scientific research. "There has been a very insidious campaign against science under the Bush administration," Clinton said in a brief meeting with reporters. "Scientists have been muzzled. Information has been taken off of government-sponsored Web sites. The leaders of our country have dismissed scientific research and advancements. They've denied the factual basis of so much that we take for granted."

She criticized the Bush administration for undertaking a "concerted effort against stem cell research" and "a campaign against evolution" education. "It has been relentless," she said. In visiting the new Academy of Sciences, due to open in October 2008, Clinton hailed institutions that "can perpetuate curiosity and intellectual inquiry and scientific enterprise. "But it would help to have a president who actually supported science again," she said.

Clinton also used the visit to publicize her proposal to spend $1 billion to make schools, firehouses, police stations and public offices more energy efficient. The idea is related to her proposed $50 billion strategic fund for new energy technologies to reduce oil dependence and greenhouse gas pollution blamed for global warming. She was accompanied throughout the tour by Newsom and Bill Patterson, chairman of the board of the California Academy of Sciences.

Afterward, Newsom formally endorsed Clinton, joining Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez on the list of Clinton's California supporters.

"I truly believe she will make an extraordinary president. I believe in her capacity to bring people together. I believe in her generosity of spirit," Newsom said. "And I believe there is simply no person with more experience and more capacity to unite this country around our common goals and unite the rest of the planet beneath a focus on our common humanity."

Clinton praised Newsom for backing universal health care and environmental policies that "break through the wall of skepticism and fatalism. "You and I share a deep and abiding concern about the future of our country and the world. And we share an optimism that we can address these issues if we start looking for solutions," she told the mayor.

By Peter Hecht, The Sacramento Bee, August 11, 2007

HOUSTON - Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton, continuing her efforts to secure the endorsement of unions, told a crowd of nearly 1,100 people at a labor hall Saturday that she will fight to help the middle class if elected.

"Nobody works harder than Americans. Wages aren't up. Benefits aren't secure. But corporate profits are up. It's not the rich who made America great. It's the hard working middle class," Clinton said as the crowd at the Communications Workers of America hall loudly cheered.

While Clinton's nearly 30 minute campaign speech touched on a variety of issues, including the war in Iraq, lessening America's dependence on foreign oil and offering more support for the country's police officers and military veterans, the New York senator's comments focused mainly on her support of the working middle class and the labor movement.

"This is a house that labor built," she said. "The American middle class owes a lot to the labor movement."

Like other presidential candidates, Clinton is seeking the endorsement of organized labor. On Wednesday, the AFL-CIO, the nation's largest federation of labor unions, postponed making an unanimous endorsement in the Democratic presidential primary, freeing its 55 unions to decide which candidates to support. Although union membership has declined over the years, the AFL-CIO remains a political force. Labor endorsements are prized for both the money and the personnel that unions can provide.

Clinton said President Bush has ignored the concerns that many middle class Americans have, including a lack of health insurance, relief from rising gas prices and continued funding for afterschool programs.

"There are a lot of people in Texas, probably in this room that don't have health insurance. You might as well be invisible to President Bush," she said. "We had afterschool programs. We thought it was a good thing to help working families. All of that has been cut back. We are going to make that visible. We are not going to have invisible working parents."

Clinton also promised to end the "outsourcing of our government. We have more private contract employees than military and civilian employees combined."

Her Democratic and Republican rivals have accused Clinton of being influenced by corporate lobbyists and not sharing the beliefs and needs of the average worker. "Hillary Clinton will say or do anything as she continues to pander to big labor bosses but at the end of the day rank and file workers are opposed to the higher taxes that she continues to advocate," said Paul Lindsay, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee.

"I'm the middle class. I think they are very important issues," she said.

By Juan A. Lozano, Associated Press, August 11, 2007

WASHINGTON - Never before in American history have so many U.S. senators run for the presidency at once and never before have the exertions of a presidential campaign taken such a toll on Capitol Hill attendance.

With the exception of Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York, who somehow has found a balance point between Senate duties and front-runner status that has eluded her contemporaries, the hunt for the White House has turned U.S. senators into big-time truants.

Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain, for example, has missed 149 of the 310 roll call votes held this year, an absenteeism rate of 48.1 percent -- the highest of any senator seeking the presidency. A FOX News analysis shows McCain missed votes on final passage of key legislation, including the new terrorism surveillance program, the bill implementing the remaining 9/11 commission recommendations, the homeland security spending bill, increased federal aid for college loans and tuition, the energy bill, a no confidence vote in Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and legislation to increase the bounty on Usama bin Laden from $25 million to $50 million.

McCain's campaign declined to explain why McCain missed so many votes dealing with national security, but national campaign spokeswoman Jill Hazelbaker said McCain is committed to his duties in the Senate and representing Arizona residents. "As primaries approach and the demands of the campaign increase, votes will have to be missed, but the senator has a policy of returning for important debates where his vote will affect the outcome of the legislation," Hazelbaker said. McCain had been more visible in the Senate before the August recess and led the charge against bipartisan efforts -- fueled primarily by Democrats -- to begin withdrawing U.S. forces from Iraq this year and remove most combat forces by the end of April. It was unusual to see McCain occupy so much floor time during the heated mid-July debate as he'd been virtually invisible from Senate action for much of the year. McCain's presence, though, owed as much to his determination to thwart efforts to rapidly remove U.S. troops from Iraq as to his campaign's inability to finance extensive travel.

In one episode, McCain famously snapped at fellow Republican Sen. John Cornyn in the final hours leading up to the final failure of ill-fated immigration reform after Cornyn questioned McCain's commitment to the fine points of the legislation since he had spent so much time on the campaign trail. McCain's verbal diatribe against Cornyn, a genial Texan, peppered with at least one use of the F-word, became a fresh Capitol Hill example of McCain's legendary and profane temper.

Another Republican, Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas, has also missed a significant number of floor votes -- 123 of the 310 cast. Among Brownback's missed key votes: the Sept. 11 security bill, the homeland security spending bill, the college tuition bill, the energy bill, the no confidence vote in Gonzales and the emergency spending bill financing the Iraq war. "I am concerned about the votes that I have missed. I missed a number of votes while I was in Iraq assessing the War on Terror. I also missed votes when I was in Greensburg, Kansas, surveying the tornado damage. And I've missed votes due to campaign events," Brownback told FOX News. "It is difficult to balance being in the Senate with being on the campaign trail, but I will continue to work hard to find balance and represent Kansas to the best of my ability." Like McCain, the Brownback camp says many votes were skipped when Brownback's absence or presence wouldn't have affected the outcome. "He has made a point to drop what he is doing and get back for votes when they are close or his vote is absolutely needed, but has missed several where it wasn't close his absence was equal on the books as a no vote if present," said Brownback spokesman Brian Hart.

Among the six senators seeking the presidency, Clinton's attendance record appears positively radiant. Clinton's missed only 11 of 310 votes or 3.5 percent of the total. Clinton aides offered no explanation on her approach to balancing campaigning and Senate duties and had nothing to say about the voting record of Democratic or Republican senators seeking the presidency.

Illinois Democratic Sen. Barack Obama not only runs second to Clinton in party preference for the presidency, he runs second to Clinton in senatorial attendance. Obama has missed 59 of 310 votes or 19 percent of the votes taken this year. Among Obama's missed votes: the Sept. 11 security bill, the homeland security spending bill, the college tuition bill, the no confidence vote in Gonzales and the move to increase the bounty on bin Laden. Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton declined to discuss specific votes missed, skirting a question about why Obama skipped a vote on increasing the bounty on bin Laden but later delivered a speech promising to pursue bin Laden unilaterally if the U.S. had "actionable" intelligence on his whereabouts.

The declaration about using the U.S. military to attack bin Laden -- with or without Pakistan's permission -- has provoked widespread debate in political and foreign policy circles because it sought to portray Obama as more muscular in the War on Terror than his Democratic challengers. The contrast between that stance and the missed vote on bin Laden's bounty may arise in future campaign debates. Burton would only say that Obama played a role in passing the lobbying and ethics reform bill, identifying it as a key Obama accomplishment in the 110th Congress.

Among the other two Democratic senators seeking the presidency, Connecticut's Christopher Dodd has missed 74 of 310 votes, or 23.9 percent of the votes taken this year. Among Dodd's missed votes: the Sept. 11 security bill, the homeland security spending bill, the no confidence vote on Gonzales, the bill to increase federal support for embryonic stem cell research and the bin Laden bounty. Campaign spokeswoman Colleen Flanagan declined to comment on Dodd's voting record.

Delaware's Joe Biden has missed 78 of 310 votes, or 25.2 percent of votes taken this year. Among Biden's missed votes: the no confidence vote on Gonzales and the bin Laden bounty. "Senator Biden has cast over 12,000 votes in his 34-year Senate career and he is proud of his legislative record, which includes authoring the Violence Against Women Act, the landmark Crime Bill which put 100,000 new cops on the streets and legislation this year to bring an end to the Iraq war," said Biden spokeswoman Elizabeth Alexander. "And while travel is required to compete as a 2008 presidential candidate, he has assured Senate leadership that he will not miss votes where the outcome hangs in the balance."

By Major Garrett, FOX News, August 10, 2007

Despite his rising status as the rockstar of the Democratic Party, Barack Obama has proven that no amount of popularity can match the experience and knowledge required to master the complexities of foreign policy.

Obama threatened to unilaterally bomb Pakistan if actionable intelligence placed high-level al-Qaeda operatives in Pakistan and President Musharraf would not act. While this threat became a good applause line, Musharraf, a U.S. ally who faces a tough situation in Pakistan, did not take so kindly to Obama's words, and he certainly was not alone. Obama's statement, combined with his willingness at the same time to meet with crazy dictators like Chavez and Ahmadinejaid, provoked much criticism from Hillary Clinton on Obama's naive statement, and Mitt Romney weighed in as well with the best one-liner of Sunday's Republican debate: "In one week, he went from saying he's going to sit down, you know, for tea, with our enemies, but then he's going to bomb our allies. I mean, he's gone from Jane Fonda to Dr. Strangelove in one week."

In the Democratic debate that shortly followed, both Hillary Clinton and veteran Senator and foreign policy expert Chris Dodd double-teamed Obama for his reckless decree. At the very least, Obama's public declaration of hostility towards Pakistan does not qualify as "common sense."

No one disagrees that United States needs to pressure Pakistan to take a more active role fighting al-Qaeda in their country. Dodd and Clinton, however, understand the consequences of exerting too much pressure. As always, the United States reserves the right to take whatever actions are necessary to protect itself, but we should quietly maintain this authority and think twice about publicizing this option for a specific situation involving a specific nation. By doing this, Obama has already helped turn Pakistan against us, and he has not even stepped foot in the White House much less won the Democratic nomination.

A leading English Pakistani newspaper, DAWN, reports that the Pakistani lawmakers-from both the ruling and opposition parties-have heavily criticized the current state of relations with America, citing both Obama's unilateral threat and also legislation he promotes tying aid to Pakistan with their performance against terrorists. And who could blame them? Tying aid to Pakistan's performance in fighting terrorism, much less a threat to bomb a nation, does not say much about how the U.S. values their friendship with Pakistan or appreciates the support they have already given.

One cannot underestimate the difficulties that face Musharraf as leader of Pakistan. Al-Jazeera recently reported on how he met with exiled opposition leader Benazir Bhutto. Now think about this. Do you think Musharraf suddenly had a miraculous change of heart? Or is he running low on support and allies in Pakistan? In fact, the BBC indicates that Musharraf briefly considered declaring a state of emergency due to the volatile political and security situation in his country. Part of it may also relate to a recent raid of a radical Islamic mosque in Pakistan which, albeit controversial, certainly shows his commitment to fighting terrorism. Hopefully it will not provoke a fourth assassination attempt on Musharraf.

Somehow, I could not imagine how Obama's comments would help ease the tension or value the work Musharraf has already done and continues to do. Obama needs to understand that his statements affect more than polling numbers.

Furthermore, even if Obama does follow up on his words and executes a successful strike, we still have to worry about what happens next. Well, if it destabilizes Pakistan enough so that radicals can oust Musharraf and take over the country, essentially we have a rogue nation armed with nuclear weapons, a possibility which Clinton wisely pointed out. If that happens, Obama would have to refocus his efforts from Iraq to the real front in the war on terror as he says, but not exactly in the way that he imagined. Furthermore, although everyone wants us to get bin Laden, realistically, how much will it help us in the grand scheme of things?

Osama bin Laden may be an important person in the war on terror, but he's ultimately just that, another person. Successors will always exist, and Al-Qaeda will move on after his capture or death. Ultimately, if the U.S. does not do more to support moderate Muslim people and governments in the Middle East, al-Qaeda and other Islamic terrorist groups will continue to attract followers and sway those on the borderline between anger and extremism.

Bombing a sovereign Muslim nation which, in spite of its problems, has provided a lot of support to the United States, would only marginalize the influence of moderate Muslims in the Middle East and encourage more people to join Islamic terrorist groups.

Beyond the targeted lines and applause Obama generated confronting Dodd and Clinton, he clearly has lost focus of the big picture in terms of both foreign policy and his battle with Hillary, who has recently gained on Obama in part due to their foreign policy scuffle preceding this debate. Obama has managed to generate bipartisan opposition to his talk on Pakistan, and that constitutes quite the accomplishment, because when someone says "bipartisan opposition," usually people have another politician in mind. While Hillary Clinton has developed a not-so-stellar reputation among Republicans, if in a future debate she delivers an excoriating rebuke to Obama for his conduct concerning the deeply troubling situation in Pakistan, this Republican may have to stand up, clap, and say, "Speak the truth, Hillary!"

By Mike Wacker, The Cornell Daily Sun, August 10, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - More Republican Party supporters in the Golden State would like Rudy Giuliani to become their United States presidential nominee in 2008, according to a poll by SurveyUSA released by KABC-TV. 39 per cent of GOP primary voters in California would back the former New York City mayor in 2008, up seven points since July.

Actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson is second with 19 per cent, followed by Arizona senator John McCain with 16 per cent, and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney with 10 per cent.

In the sample of Democratic Party supporters, New York senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is first with 51 per cent, followed by Illinois senator Barack Obama with 27 per cent, and former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 14 per cent.

The Republican and Democratic presidential primaries in California will take place on Feb. 5, 2008. In 2004, Massachusetts senator John Kerry won the Democratic California primary with 64 per cent of the vote. Incumbent president George W. Bush won the Republican contest unopposed

"Even more than tiny New Hampshire, Iowa seems to entrance the candidates and their campaigns. This is what grates on other states of all sizes. The big ones gaze in wonder at what Iowa has wrought, the small ones gaze with envy."

Nearly half the states in the country now plan to hold their 2008 presidential nominating events before Valentine's Day. How long before? The soonest could come the week before Christmas, if not sooner.

Why on Earth is this happening?

It's not because the voters in any of these states are desperate to make their choices so early in the year. Nor do they wish to go to the polls before they've thrown out the Christmas tree - or finished trimming it.

Surely the country as a whole is not longing for a February-to-November campaign in which one Republican battles one Democrat in an endless series of attack ads.

No one wants this hyper-accelerated nominating calendar. Not the states, the parties, the candidates or the media. Yet we have it, and it's still gaining speed.

This week, we saw South Carolina's Republicans move their primary from the 29th of January to the 19th (where they will probably be joined by the South Carolina Democrats). Their move was prompted by Florida, which muscled in on the 29th to bigfoot South Carolina and cut it on its action as the first Southern primary (a distinction the Palmetto state has enjoyed since 1980).

But this duel for the distinction of being the Dixie trigger primary is only a part of the earlier-is-better dynamic. By going to the 19th, the Carolinians are getting ahead of "first in the nation" New Hampshire, where the primary is tentatively set for January 22nd. That activates a provision in New Hampshire state law by which the primary must come at least seven days before any other. This means New Hampshire will soon move up at least to January 12. That's a Saturday, so the primary may move up further still.

New Hampshire has been expecting this, and state officials are also keeping a wary eye on Michigan, where Democrats now slated to hold a caucus on February 9 have been threatening to leap to the front of the line.

All of which brings us to the state of Iowa, where state law says the party caucuses will be held eight days or more before any other state stages a primary or a caucus. If New Hampshire moves up as expected, Iowa will have to move to the first week of January – at the latest. And if New Hampshire moves up to January 8 or 9, Iowa may have to leapfrog all the way into December.

Realistically, given New Year's and Christmas, that means landing somewhere in mid-December. That's a time when most Iowans are focused entirely on the holidays and all the family activities of the season. Party caucuses? Be serious.

But it's no accident that the squeeze is on this one Midwestern state. In fact, it is fair to say the current crisis is largely about Iowa.

Ever since Democrats George McGovern and Jimmy Carter made breakthrough use of the Iowa caucus in the 1970s, the small-scale Monday night tradition has garnered a disproportionate amount of candidate and media attention.

There have been down years like 1992, when favorite son Tom Harkin ran for president and gave party rivals an excuse to stay away. There have also been years when the caucus winner in one party (or both) has been dispatched in subsequent primaries (George H. W. Bush in 1980, Bob Dole and Dick Gephardt in 1988).

Yet in cycle after cycle, would-be presidents have given the hamlets and haylofts of the Hawkeye State an enormous slice of their time and fealty. Even more than tiny New Hampshire, Iowa seems to entrance the candidates and their campaigns. This is what grates on other states of all sizes. The big ones gaze in wonder at what Iowa has wrought, the small ones gaze with envy.

This year, the megastates such as California, Texas and New York all moved their primaries to February 5, believing the candidates would ratchet back on the Iowa time. Instead, it turns out the effect of Tsunami Tuesday is perfectly perverse. The earliest small-state events have become more imperative than ever, and Iowa's most of all.

Even those contenders best attuned to the test of February 5 (such as Rudy Giuliani, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama) are spending day after day in Iowa. It's the law of unintended consequences on crack.

So by thrusting their own events ever deeper into January, the South Carolinas and Michigans are quite deliberately forcing Iowa to the brink. Push that first caucus into mid-December and it may just become untenable. The candidates will have to reassess and reprioritize. Won't they?

Perhaps. But no one should bet against the special magic of being first, whenever the events are held. Iowa's caucus system has a way of surviving all efforts to suppress it.

Still, one can hope this year's rush to January will finally summon a moment of clarity on the subject of our nominating system. Maybe that nine-month-long general election campaign will start a movement toward a more rational system, top to bottom.

By Ron Elving, N P R, August 10, 2007

TRENTON -- Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and U.S. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton continue to hold double-digit leads among New Jersey voters in their quest for the presidency, according to a poll released Thursday.

However, the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll shows Giuliani's popularity slipping among New Jerseyans and finds Clinton has less support among female voters than her Democratic predecessors in the 2000 and 2004 presidential contests. "Both of these elements bear watching as the 2008 campaign unfolds," said Tim Vercellotti, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll.

The telephone survey, conducted Aug. 2-7, polled 891 New Jersey adults who said they are registered to vote. The poll has a sampling error of plus or minus 3.3 percentage points.

Among Republicans polled, 61 percent said they would support Giuliani in the Feb. 5 primary. Arizona Sen. John McCain was a distant second, with 10 percent support. Former U.S. Sen. Fred Thompson was third, with 8 percent.

Among Democrats and those who lean Democratic, 45 percent of respondents said they would support Clinton in the primary, compared with 21 percent for Sen. Barack Obama and 16 percent backing 2004 vice presidential nominee John Edwards.

About half of those who declared support for Giuliani or Clinton said they could change their minds before the primary.

Although Giuliani and Clinton continue to enjoy widespread support among New Jersey voters, both candidates have baggage.

Giuliani's favorability rating has dropped 18 points since June 2006, from 72 percent down to 54 percent, though he still has the highest favorability rating among leading presidential candidates of both parties. The favorability rating for both Clinton and Obama is 50 percent.

By Angela Delli Santi, Associated Press, August 10, 2007

Never did she look more at home, though, more effortlessly herself, than when counterpunching on health care.

At her first Nevada event of the day, on a stage before hundreds of black journalists gathered for their national convention at Bally's, an apparently conservative questioner accused her of favoring socialized medicine like that of England and Canada and asked why she would support a program that would be so bad for impoverished black people.

"Oh man, there are so many misrepresentations there I need more time to answer," she said. The notion that she favored socialized medicine was a myth of the right wing, said the candidate whose greatest failure in public life was the defeat of her health care reform plan. That setback, during her husband's first term in office, is credited with helping Republicans seize control of Congress in 1994.

She expounded on the failures of American health care and its need for reform. Then the swift kick: "See my staff and we'll get you some more information if you're interested in being educated instead of rhetorical," her voice sharpening and rising slightly.

The crowd, journalists trained not to respond to politicians, rather loved it.

She rolled out an urban poverty agenda and addressed the genocide in Darfur and the reconstruction of New Orleans.

Later, Clinton told a raucous crowd of Culinary Union workers that if their contract negotiations with MGM Mirage end in stalemate and strike, she'll walk with them. It was a foot-stomping performance by the presidential contender, one sure to be repeated by her chief rivals for the Democratic nomination: Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards.

Thursday was Clinton's day in Nevada, however.

Even just six months ago, her performance as a campaigner could be uneven when on a stage in front of big crowds. Her voice had a rising and falling inflection that seemed like a barrier between her and the crowd. Her strength was in theater-in-the-round formats, her famous "conversations."

Thursday, though, on the stage at Bally's, in the crammed union hall and at a house party on the East side, Clinton's performances looked effortless.

After declaring solidarity with Culinary members, it was off to the house party, where she was introduced by freshman Assemblyman Ruben Kihuen, the first-ever immigrant legislator in Nevada and a sought-after endorsement. After a short speech, the crowd pressed in on her for photographs and autographs. At this, there are few better at working a crowd efficiently. She signs, smiles, hugs and turns. Then she does it again, and again, and soon, the crowd, which seemed as thick as a swarm, begins to thin out. After a quick visit with her hosts, Jose and Maria Espinoza, Clinton was off to Las Angeles.

She returns to Nevada on Monday.

By J Patrick Coolican, Las Vegas Sun, August 10, 2007

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton was the winner of last night's gay-rights presidential forum - even though she seemed "tortured" over gay marriage, a panel assembled by The Post said.

Some in the group of eight gay New Yorkers - undecided voters who gathered in the Union Square-area apartment of furniture-gallery owner Evan Lobel to watch the debate over a Chinese-food dinner - said they even saw, for the first time, a hint of her husband's vaunted political charm.

"You saw a little bit of Bill in her," said Michael Evans, 26, who lives in the West Village and said he's not a Hillary fan. "It was like, Wow! She's empathetic. She's not totally evil."

Members of the Post panel at various points laughed, rolled their eyes, and listened attentively as the major candidates dodged the issue of gay marriage.

But all said they were impressed with Clinton's performance - noting the moment she turned to the crowd to single out a gay member of the military whom she knows. "She's really brilliant at the way she works the audience," said Jo-Ann Shain, of Flatbush, Brooklyn, who watched with partner Mary Jo Kennedy.

The two were plaintiffs in the historic gay-marriage lawsuit in the Big Apple in 2004.

Sen. Barack Obama and former Sen. John Edwards both tanked with the panel, with several saying the Illinois senator seemed "green" and the former North Carolina lawmaker seemed "inauthentic."

Michelangelo Signorile, a Sirius radio show host, rapped the field for refusing to back gay marriage, saying, "The Republicans are going to say [the Democrats are] for same-sex marriage anyway."

When New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said homosexuality is "a choice," some members of the panel gasped.

"He's circling the drain," Kennedy said. The two biggest laughs of the night came when rocker Melissa Etheridge asked Edwards if he was comfortable being in a gay crowd, and when long-shot candidate Mike Gravel thanked "the gays" for tuning in.

Dennis Kucinich, who supports same-sex marriage, won high marks - but not for his chances of victory. "He'll be great on the 'Surreal Life'," Lobel said.

By Maggie Haberman, New York Post, August 10, 2007

The conservative movement that for a generation has been the source of the Republican Party's strength is in the dumps

The right has dominated American politics since at least 1980. The Republicans' electoral successes have been striking: five out of seven presidential elections since 1980 and a dramatic seizure of the House in 1994 after 40 years of Democratic rule. Even more striking has been the right's success in making the political weather.

Yet today this mighty movement is in deep trouble. Veteran activists are sunk in gloom ("I've never seen conservatives so downright fed up," says Richard Viguerie, a conservative stalwart). And the other side is cock-a-hoop. Stanley Greenberg, a Democratic pollster, describes the shift from conservatism as "breathtaking".

The Democrats are well positioned to retake the White House in 2008. True, the Republican front-runner, Rudy Giuliani, a "big tent" Republican who combines liberal views on abortion and gay marriage with stellar credentials as "America's mayor", is a strong candidate. The Democratic front-runner, Hillary Clinton, suffers from high negatives and a scandal-prone husband. But the Clinton operation looks far more professional than Mr Giuliani's-and he has plenty of scandals of his own.

Overall, the Democrats are much more confident: 40% of Republicans believe that the Democrats will win, but just 12% of Democrats believe that the Republicans will win. They are more motivated: in the second quarter the two leading Democrats raised $60m, against just $32m for the two leading Republicans. And 61% of Democratic primary voters are happy with their choice of candidates, compared with only 36% of Republicans. Generic polls show voters expressing a preference for a Democratic president by a 24-point margin, a gap unheard of since the Watergate era.

The Democrats are also likely to keep Congress. The tide that enabled the party to pick up 31 House seats and six Senate seats in 2006, along with six governorships and 321 state-legislature seats, is still swelling. The Republicans will be defending more vulnerable Senate seats than the Democrats in 2008, and they are losing the race for cash. The public favours Democratic control of Congress by a margin of 10-15 points. Off the record, Republicans use words like "catastrophe" and "Armageddon" to refer to 2008.

The issues that people care about are also tipping the Democrats' way. A Pew Research poll in March discovered growing worry about income inequality combined with growing support for the social safety net. The proportion of Americans who believe that "the government should help the needy even if it means greater debt" has risen from 41% in 1994, at the height of the Republican revolution, to 54% today. The poll also revealed a decline in support for the things that drove the Republican resurgence in the mid-1990s, such as traditional moral values.

The Republicans have alienated America's fastest-growing electoral block-Hispanics-with their visceral opposition to immigration reform. Nearly 70% of Hispanics voted Democratic in House races in 2006, up from 55% in 2004. That trend is sure to have been solidified by the Republicans' recent scuppering of the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill, in a revolt sodden with xenophobia. Lyndon Johnson once noted that the Democrats' support for civil rights had cost them the South for a generation; the Republican Party's opposition to immigration reform may well have cost it the Hispanic vote for a generation.

Republicans have also whipped up a storm of opposition among middle-of-the-road voters on social issues. The religious right's opposition to abortion has always been an electoral liability: only 30% of voters favour overturning Roe v Wade. But in the past few years social conservatives tested people's patience still further over a federal marriage amendment and Terri Schiavo. Fully 72% of Republican voters opposed the Republicans' attempt to use the might of the federal government to keep the severely brain-damaged woman alive. The voters got their revenge in the 2006 mid-term elections-"bloody Tuesday" in the words of Troy Newman, the president of Operation Rescue, an anti-abortion group. Rick Santorum, once the religious right's most prominent champion in the Senate, barely scraped 41% of the vote in Pennsylvania. Ken Blackwell, social conservatism's most prominent black champion, went down to a humiliating defeat in the race for the Ohio governorship. Social conservatives lost ballot initiatives on everything from abortion to gay marriage.

Why the conservative crack-up?

The obvious cause of the right's implosion is the implosion of the Bush presidency. Mr Bush has the worst approval ratings since Jimmy Carter-29% according to Newsweek and 31% according to NBC News. Only 19% of Americans think that America is headed in the right direction under Mr Bush. An astonishing 45% of Americans, including 13% of Republicans, support impeaching Mr Bush, according to the American Research Group.

The most obvious cause of the implosion of the Bush presidency is the disaster in Iraq. The Republican Party's biggest advantage over the Democrats has long been on foreign and defence policy. You voted Democratic if you cared about schools and hospitals. But you voted Republican if you cared more about keeping America safe in a dangerous world. September 11th 2001 turbo-charged that advantage. The Republicans used the "war on terror" to roll over the Democrats in elections in 2002 and again in 2004.

But the war in Iraq has buried this vital advantage under a mound of discredited hype ("mission accomplished") and mind-boggling incompetence. A CBS News/New York Times poll found that only 25% of people approved of Mr Bush's handling of the situation in Iraq. An ABC News/Washington Post poll found that 63% of respondents did not trust the Bush administration to report honestly about possible threats from other countries. The damage is not limited to the Bush administration: a Rasmussen poll on July 25th-26th found that Mrs Clinton outscores Mr Giuliani as the candidate voters trust most on national security.

A third fight concerns Mr Bush's foreign policy, particularly his stubborn defence of the Iraq war. Some conservatives predicted that the "war on terror" might take the place of the "war on communism", both as a glue holding conservatism together and a guarantee of long-term Republican advantage over the Democrats. That happened for a while. But the sustained unrest in Iraq has opened deep divisions on the right-not least between Mr Bush (who rides off into the sunset in January 2009) and politicians who would like to hang around for a bit longer. Senate Republicans are on the verge of a full-scale revolt against the White House.

The Democrats have ceded a lot of ground to the conservatives. The party has sidelined liberal groups who oppose the death penalty or want to restrict gun-ownership. The big three Democratic presidential candidates compete with each other to prove how religious they are: Mrs Clinton repeatedly claims that she is a "praying person" who once considered becoming a Methodist minister. The Party put forward anti-abortion candidates in both Colorado and Pennsylvania.

And the conservative movement is at its most deadly as an insurgency. The movement was born during the 1964 Goldwater campaign as a revolt against the liberal establishment. It enjoyed its glory days when it was battling Hillarycare and trying to impeach Bill Clinton. A Clinton presidential nomination would undoubtedly reunite and re-energise the movement. Deeply rooted in gun clubs, anti-tax groups, right-to-life groups and Evangelical churches, American conservatives will never be reduced to the feeble status of their British cousins.

But even when you enter all the qualifications the right's situation is dire. It is a sign of weakness that the conservatives are retreating to their old posture as insurgents, and need a bogeywoman like Mrs Clinton to hold them together.

The Republicans have failed the most important test of any political movement-wielding power successfully. They have botched a war. They have splurged on spending. And they have alienated a huge section of the population. It is now the Democrats' game to win or lose.

By The Economist, August 10, 2007

Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York retains her position firmly at the front of the pack of Democratic presidential candidates, with a poll Thursday giving her 44 percent of the vote, nearly double the 24 percent garnered by the next-closest candidate, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois.

Former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina was favored by 16 percent of the 458 registered voters who described themselves as Democrats or as independents who lean Democratic. New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson followed with 5 percent, Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware attracted 3 percent and Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio won 2 percent. Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut and former Sen. Mike Gravel of Alaska each attracted less than one half of one percent.

While Clinton appear to be firmly entrenched as the front-runner, there is one important warning sign for the Clinton campaign. Among Democrats who did not graduate from college, she leads Obama by 26 points, but among Democrats with a college degree, Clinton has only a three-point edge. Turnout is much higher among college graduates, particularly in the primary season, so the Clinton camp may have to work harder to turn her lead in the polls into victory at the ballot box.

A Washington Post/ABC News poll of Iowa voters released on August 3 had Clinton, Obama and Edwards in a virtual tie in that key early caucus state. Obama led with 27 percent, while Clinton and Edwards both had 26 percent.

The CNN/Opinion Research poll, which had a sampling error of plus-or-minus 4.5 points, was conducted August 6-8 and involved telephone interviews with 1,029 adults.

Since June, no candidate's support has changed by more than one point.

By CNN, August 9, 2007

All the major Democratic presidential candidates-and none of the Republicans-will be in Los Angeles tonight for what was billed as a nonpartisan forum on issues important to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans. The televised event showcases the status that gays' votes and money have earned them in the Democratic Party, but also the continued controversy of their cause.

Writer and gay-rights advocate David Mixner recognizes this as much as anyone. Two decades ago, the 1988 presidential campaign of Democratic nominee Michael Dukakis, fearful of controversy, declined an offer by Mr. Mixner and three wealthy friends to raise $1 million from the gay community. In 1992, he raised $3.5 million for Bill Clinton's campaign. Now, he is backing former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards and doesn't know how much he has raised, but says, "I've done real well." The entire Democratic field's support of gay rights is so similarly strong that Mr. Mixner picked Mr. Edwards based on an unrelated matter: his opposition to the Iraq war. All the major Democrats favor civil unions for gay couples, and repeal of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy against openly gay service members that front-runner Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's husband initiated.

Their Republican counterparts don't; former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney have pivoted away from their previous stands favoring gay rights as they seek the nomination of a party in which social conservatives hold sway.

Still, the Democrats' courtship of gay voters goes only so far. None of the Democrats, except for two dark-horse candidates, supports what is for many in the gay community the top goal: marriage rights. In large measure, this reflects Democrats' fear of an issue Republicans used effectively in 2004 to put them on the defensive and mobilize Republicans' conservative ranks behind President Bush's re-election.

Tonight's event is co-sponsored by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, a gay-rights activist group, and Viacom Inc.'s Logo network, which will broadcast it on cable TV and its Web site at 9 p.m. EDT. It is titled "The Visible Vote '08: A Presidential Forum" -- reflecting the gay community's sense of its increased prominence in the Democratic Party. A similar forum was held for Democratic candidates four years ago, but didn't have a media sponsor.

Because Democrats have aired their general positions on gay issues in previous, wide-ranging debates, "We're going to be able to use the opportunity to ask more in-depth questions -- about how they actually came to their positions, and how they might implement them as president," says Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign. He will be one of three questioners, including lesbian recording star Melissa Etheridge, who will quiz the candidates one at a time for about 18 minutes each.

Measures of gay Americans' votes and political contributions are hard to come by, given the difficulty of identifying who is gay. But Democrats have come to believe such support is significant, especially given this community's increasing activism since the 1980s and its overwhelming pro-Democratic tilt as the Republican Party grew more socially conservative. "Republicans have walked off the field, and so that magnifies [gays'] power in the Democratic Party," says Steve Elmendorf, a gay Democratic strategist. An editorial on the Human Rights Campaign's Web site recently admonished gay people not to rely simply on "checkbook activism" but to speak out and take action as well. "We must remember that civil rights can't be bought," it says.

Surveys suggest that gay people have higher incomes than the population as a whole, and are more likely to make political contributions. A recent poll by Community Marketing Inc., a San Francisco firm specializing in gay-and-lesbian market research, found that 40% of gay men and 31% of lesbian respondents said they had given money to a political party in the previous year. In a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, 7% of adults surveyed said they had donated to a campaign. Attempting to quantify "gay dollars," last week the Washington Blade, a gay newspaper in the nation's capital, reported its analysis of the presidential candidates' campaign contributions from the 34 "gayest" neighborhoods in the nation, using ZIP Codes in the candidates' financial reports to the Federal Election Commission. The ZIP Codes, including for Washington, D.C.'s Dupont Circle, Provincetown, Mass., and West Hollywood, were picked based on Census data of same-sex households, rankings in gay-market surveys and a survey of editors in major cities.

The Blade's analysis found that nearly half of the contributions from those enclaves went to New York's Sen. Clinton. Second, with 38%, was Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, who has been her chief rival in fund raising and poll standings overall. Mr. Edwards was next with 13%. Their total contributions from gay areas, while not insignificant, weren't a major share of the candidates' overall fund raising, according to the Blade: Mrs. Clinton's $2.2 million for January through June is about 4% of her total, it said, while Mr. Obama's $1.7 million and Mr. Edwards's $609,520 is about 3% of their respective totals. Mr. Edwards's total fell short of the $767,676 that Mr. Giuliani received from "the gayest ZIP Codes," the Blade said.

The North Carolinian faced a question in an earlier candidates forum about his statement that his Southern Baptist upbringing leaves him conflicted about gay marriage. His wife, Elizabeth, this year publicly came out in support of gay marriage at a San Francisco gay-pride event, and has been something of an ambassador to the gay community for her husband, Mr. Mixner says. The Blade analysis shows that contributions to Mr. Edwards from mostly gay neighborhoods were up in the second quarter. Earlier this week, days before the Los Angeles gay-rights forum, he alone among the Democrats issued a statement decrying Mr. Bush's threatened veto of pending legislation for a federal hate-crimes law that gay activists support.

As for Republicans, Patrick Sammon, president of the gay political group Log Cabin Republicans, says he remains optimistic that his party won't always be opposed to gay rights. "Our party, to be a majority, has to get independent voters. And using antigay politics is a sure way to turn those voters against it."

By Jackie Calmes, The Wall Street Journal, August 9, 2007

Deborah Barfield Berry of Gannett News Service gives us a fill on what Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said at the National Association of Black Journalists conference in Las Vegas.

Among other things, Berry reports, Clinton was asked if she is "black enough." Clinton cited "my experience and my ideas" as reasons to choose her over Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, who is black.

She also said she was "thrilled" to be running for president when the field has candidates who are Hispanic, black and female. Obama, her top rival for the Democratic nomination, speaks to the journalists' group on Friday.

Asked about possible running mates, Clinton said there is a good pool of candidates to choose from among Democrats -- including Obama. "This is a good problem to have," she said. "We are so far outclassing Republicans."

Clinton also proposed a "youth opportunity agenda." She called it a "crisis" that 1.4 million young black men are "out of school, out of work and too often out of hope."

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has widened her lead over rival Sen. Barack Obama in the swing states of Florida, Pennsylvania and Ohio - and she's moved into a dead heat with the GOP's Rudy Giuliani in each of them.

In a Quinnipiac University poll released yesterday, Clinton has 43 percent of the Florida Democratic primary vote, compared to Obama's 13 percent.

In Ohio, she leads 41 percent to 16 percent, while Obama comes closest to her in Pennsylvania, getting 19 percent to Clinton's 35 percent.

In Florida, Clinton leads Giuliani in a head-to-head matchup, 46 percent to 44 percent.

In Ohio, the two are tied with 43 percent apiece, and in Pennsylvania, Clinton takes 45 percent to Giuliani's 44 percent.

Clinton had received less than 40 percent of support in the primary races in Ohio and Florida in the last round of Quinnipiac surveys.

"Sen. Clinton is inching ahead," said polling assistant director Peter Brown.

By Maggie Haberman, New York Post, August 9, 2007

The 2008 presidential campaign strategists must be as wily as chess masters in allocating resources with front-loaded primaries and an ever-changing calendar. It gets more complicated today as South Carolina and New Hampshire signal intentions to move up their balloting, which may lead to voting as early as December. South Carolina officials want to protect their first-in- the-South status after Florida advanced, and are now in partnership with officials from New Hampshire who insist that their primary must come first. This may affect the timing of a number of other contests and create genuine calendar chaos. Already, California, New York and other states with troves of convention delegates and expensive media markets have all advanced their primaries to Feb. 5.

This compressed early schedule means "you have to work harder than you ever have worked in your life,'' said Howard Wolfson, a top adviser to Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton. "You've got to do everything you can to meet as many people as possible.''

The still-evolving calendar will require tough choices even for candidates with plenty of cash, such as New York Senator Clinton, her main Democratic competitor Barack Obama and Republicans Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney. With some candidates likely to spend $7 million to $15 million in Iowa alone, they will be forced to calibrate budgets for as many as 23 other states that may hold contests by Feb. 5, much earlier than ever before.

'Incredibly Expensive'

Clinton, 59, with about $33 million on hand and the benefit of broad name recognition from eight years as first lady, so far is the only leading candidate who hasn't aired any television and radio ads. That will change; she solicited donations in May, saying the advertising needed is "incredibly expensive.''

Obama, 46, an Illinois senator, bought ads in early states to increase his name recognition. He had $34 million available at the end of the second quarter and plans to make significant media buys in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina in the next few months, a campaign adviser said. Giuliani, 63, the Republican frontrunner nationally, has about half as much cash on hand as Clinton and Obama and is putting resources into some of the bigger states.

Giuliani's Strategy... The former New York mayor had Florida atop his travel schedule with 13 visits there this year. He has made eight trips each to South Carolina and California. He started airing radio ads in Iowa and New Hampshire last month and has made eight forays into New Hampshire and seven into Iowa, including a four- day visit this week. He must decide whether to go all-out in Iowa and New Hampshire where he now trails Romney or to save more money for the bigger contests a few weeks later.

"It is crucial for candidates to do well in Iowa and New Hampshire and simultaneously be out of the starting gate for the Feb. 5 super event,'' said Steffen Schmidt, a political science professor at Iowa State University in Ames, Iowa.

Romney, 60, is adopting that strategy. With $12 million in campaign cash and a personal fortune of as much as $250 million, the former Massachusetts governor is investing heavily in advertising in Iowa and New Hampshire months before the first vote. Some of the consequences already are evident. Arizona Senator John McCain, 70, started out as the Republican front- runner and ran through his money building a national campaign. Then the fund-raising coffers ran dry. Romney, fourth in national polls, leads in Iowa and New Hampshire thanks to his spending.

Less well-funded candidates, such as Democrats John Edwards and New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson and probable Republican contender Fred Thompson, are making different calculations.

Edwards and Richardson are betting almost exclusively on single contests -- the Iowa caucuses for Edwards and the scheduled Jan. 19 Nevada caucuses for Richardson -- to give them momentum. By placing his chips on Iowa, where he finished second in 2004, Edwards, 54, has made the Democratic race there a three- way competition with Clinton and Obama.

On the Republican side, former Tennessee Senator Thompson, who is expected to announce after Labor Day, must decide whether he is going to compete in the early Iowa and New Hampshire contests.

Florida's moving its primary to Jan. 29 is posing the most immediate challenge for strategists.

South Carolina was supposed to have a lock on the first southern U.S. primary and Democrats plan to vote in the state on Jan. 29. The state's Republican Party chairman, Katon Dawson, will announce in New Hampshire today a new schedule for his party's contest.

New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner, who will be at the announcement, has authority to set the date for his state's primary, which under state law must be seven days before any other primary. If South Carolina moves its primary to Jan. 19, then New Hampshire, which always holds its contest on a Tuesday, would likely move up to Jan. 8.

As New Hampshire goes, so goes Iowa. State law there dictates holding the caucuses eight days ahead of any other state. That would move the first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses to December 2007.

By Kristin Jensen, Bloomberg, August 9, 2007

"The people in this stadium need to know who we're going to fight for," Obama said at Soldier Field. "The reason that I'm running for president is because of you, not because of folks who are writing big checks, and that's a clear message that has to be sent, I think, by every candidate."

But behind Obama's campaign rhetoric about taking on special interests lies a more complicated truth. A Globe review of Obama's campaign finance records shows that he collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from lobbyists and PACs as a state legislator in Illinois, a US senator, and a presidential aspirant.

In Obama's eight years in the Illinois Senate, from 1996 to 2004, almost two-thirds of the money he raised for his campaigns -- $296,000 of $461,000 -- came from PACs, corporate contributions, or unions, according to Illinois Board of Elections records. He tapped financial services firms, real estate developers, healthcare providers, oil companies, and many other corporate interests, the records show.

Obama's US Senate campaign committee, starting with his successful run in 2004, has collected $128,000 from lobbyists and $1.3 million from PACs, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit organization that tracks money in politics. His $1.3 million from PACs represents 8 percent of what he has raised overall. Clinton's Senate committee, by comparison, has raised $3 million from PACs, 4 percent of her total amount raised, the group said.

In addition, Obama's own federal PAC, Hopefund, took in $115,000 from 56 PACs in the 2005-2006 election cycle out of $4.4 million the PAC raised, according to CQ MoneyLine, which collects Federal Election Commission data. Obama then used those PAC contributions -- including thousands from defense contractors, law firms, and the securities and insurance industries -- to build support for his presidential run by making donations to Democratic Party organizations and candidates around the country.

Obama spokeswoman Jen Psaki said that after seeing the influence of lobbyists firsthand during his two years in Washington, Obama decided before he entered the presidential race that he would take a different approach to fund-raising than he had in the past. "He's leading by example and taking steps that he feels need to be taken on the national stage to clean up the undue influence of Washington lobbyists on the policies and priorities of Washington," Psaki said. "His leadership on this issue is an evolving process." Psaki said Obama believes that healthcare lobbyists have blocked progress toward universal health coverage, and that oil company lobbyists have blocked badly needed changes to America's energy policies.

Though Obama has returned thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from registered federal lobbyists since he declared his candidacy in February, his presidential campaign has maintained ties with lobbyists and lobbying firms to help raise some of the $58.9 million he collected through the first six months of 2007. Obama has raised more than $1.4 million from members of law and consultancy firms led by partners who are lobbyists, The Los Angeles Times reported last week. And The Hill, a Washington newspaper, reported earlier this year that Obama's campaign had reached out to lobbyists' networks to use their contacts to help build his fund-raising base.

This activity, along with Obama's past contributions from lobbyists and PACs, has drawn fire from opposing campaigns. Some political analysts say Obama, by casting himself as an uncorrupted good-government crusader, has set himself up for charges of hypocrisy.

"If you're running a campaign about credibility, that credibility and persona are so important you better be squeaky clean," said Richard Semiatin, a political scientist at American University. "While he's getting good traction out of this, I think in the long term he's really got to be careful."

From the day he entered the presidential race, Obama has projected an outside-the-Beltway persona, positioning himself as the Washington change agent that Americans are pining for. Last week, his campaign began running a new TV spot in Iowa, in which the narrator says, "He's leading by example, refusing contributions from PACs and Washington lobbyists who have too much power today." In the Democrats' previous debate, on July 23, Obama was unequivocal when challenged by former Alaska senator Mike Gravel about who his donors were.

"Well, the fact is I don't take PAC money and I don't take lobbyists' money," Obama said, touting his work on an ethics reform bill that just passed Congress. "That's the kind of leadership that I've shown in the Senate. That's the kind of leadership that I showed when I was a state legislator. And that's the kind of leadership that I'll show as president of the United States." And on June 25, right before the second quarter ended, Obama sent an e-mail to supporters asking them to contribute to his campaign to make up for the lack of special-interest money. "Candidates typically spend a week like this -- right before the critical June 30th financial reporting deadline -- on the phone day and night, begging Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs to write huge checks," the e-mail said. "Not me. Our campaign has rejected the money-for-influence game and refused to accept funds from registered federal lobbyists and political action committees."

Obama's main Democratic target on the issue of lobbyist and PAC contributions has been Clinton, whom Obama has been working to paint as a figurehead for the broken politics of Washington. Through June, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, Clinton had collected $413,000 from lobbyists and $533,000 from PACs -- leading all 2008 presidential contenders in both categories. Clinton has also raised about $3 million from PACs and $400,000 from lobbyists for her Senate campaigns, according to the group. Clinton's campaign declined to comment.

Peverill Squire, a political scientist at the University of Iowa, said Obama, given his record of raising special-interest money throughout his political career, was taking a "gamble" in holding himself up as a beacon of purity.

"He probably will be hurt if he's put in a position where he's trying to draw very fine distinctions between his present campaign and his past behavior," Squire said.

Obama's campaign is relying almost exclusively on an unprecedented network of grass-roots donors and activists -- nearly 260,000 of them had given him money through June alone. And some good-government activists say that, past fund-raising practices aside, Obama has genuinely been a champion for ethics and campaign reform, both in the Illinois Legislature and in Congress.

"On the one hand, sure, he rose to power as many people do in this town, which is to raise money from the people who have the money," said Gary Kalman, of the advocacy group US PIRG. At the same time, he added, Obama has championed public financing for elections and he fought hard to pass the federal ethics reform bill.

By Scott Helman, The Boston Globe, August 9, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - More Democratic Party supporters in the United States would like Hillary Rodham Clinton to become their presidential nominee next year, 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 a 2008 primary.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 23 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 10 per cent. Support is lower for New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, Delaware senator Joe Biden, and Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich.

On Aug. 7, Obama expressed satisfaction with the endorsement of Caroline Giuliani, daughter of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, saying, "That's very nice. We think it's wonderful that we are attracting support from young people all across the country. I can't wait to meet her."

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, August 9, 2007

COLUMBUS - Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Rudolph Giuliani are in an all-New York deadlock in Ohio in a Quinnipiac University poll on the 2008 presidential race released on Wednesday.

New York Sen. Clinton and Giuliani, the former New York mayor, each had 43 percent, compared to a 44-42 percent lead for Clinton in a July 12 poll.

The results were part of three swing state polls. In Florida, Clinton led Giuliani 46-44 percent, reversing a 46-44 percent lead for Giuliani on July 23. In Pennsylvania, Clinton squeaked ahead of Giuliani, 45-44 percent, compared to a 45-45 percent tie on June 27.

In Florida and Pennsylvania, the results were within the poll's margin of error, suggesting a virtual tossup.

In Ohio, Clinton had a big lead for the Democratic nomination with 41 percent, followed by Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois with 16 percent, 11 percent for former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards and 8 percent for former Vice President Al Gore.

Among Republicans in Ohio, Giuliani led with 29 percent, followed by Arizona Sen. John McCain and former Tennessee Sen. and "Law & Order" star Fred Thompson with 11 percent each and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich, each with 8 percent.

The poll was conducted July 30 through Monday and in Ohio, where 974 voters were interviewed, had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percent.

By William Hershey, Dayton Daily News, August 8, 2007

New York Senator Hillary Clinton has been steadily gaining support since April in her quest for the Democratic Presidential nomination. A review of the weekly polling data released by Rasmussen Reports showed Clinton averaging 33% in April, 35% in May, 36% in June and 39% in July. During the last full week in July, Clinton topped the 40% mark for the first time and the first full week in August the frontrunner earned support from 44% of Likely Democratic Primary voters.

While Clinton has been gaining support, her nearest challenger had been standing still for most of that time. Over the past week-and-a-half, however, Illinois Senator Barack Obama's support has declined for the first time since April.

The charismatic newcomer to the national political scene had enjoyed stable support in the 25% to 27% range for ten straight weeks during May, June and July. In fact, except for a brief blip to the 30% range in April, Obama's numbers have been in the mid-20s just about all year. However, his support slipped slightly to 24% during the final full week in July and slipped again to 22% in the first full week of August. This is the first time all year that Clinton has doubled Obama's support in a full week's polling sample.

Clinton and Obama fairly evenly divide the African-American vote while Clinton leads among all other demographic categories.

These trends support the conclusion reached by Rasmussen Reports a week ago: Hillary Clinton is the default candidate of the Democratic Party and will win the nomination unless something dramatically shakes up the race. At the moment, it's hard to imagine what that would be. The former First Lady is so well known that there aren't likely to be many surprises and she has so far managed to skillfully avoid any dramatic campaign miscues that would give Obama or anyone else an opening.

While nothing is inevitable, Clinton has much going for her in addition to being the solid front-runner in the polls. She has been very successful with fund-raising, has a professional campaign organization, is supported by the party establishment and even escaped relatively unscathed from her encounter with bloggers at the YearlyKos convention this past weekend. That crowd is generally to the left of Clinton politically but she appeared to handle the situation well and earn some grudging respect if not admiration.

A Clinton nomination will almost certainly yield a competitive general election. While Clinton is very popular among Democrats, overall public opinion is evenly divided--her favorable/unfavorable ratings have been near the 50/50 mark all year. The number who would definitely vote for her in a general election has stayed between 28% and 30%. The number who would definitely vote against has stayed between 46% and 48%. Both figures are the highest or nearly the highest for any candidate in either party.

Absent a major third party candidate, it is hard to envision Clinton attracting less than 45% of the vote. It is equally difficult to envision her reaching the 50% threshold barring a total collapse of the Republican campaign. That could result in a situation where fringe third party candidates determine the outcome with candidates from the left hurting the Democrats and candidates from the right hurting the GOP. It might also result in a President being elected with less than 50% of the vote for the 4th time in the last five elections.

The competitive nature of a race involving Clinton is highlighted by recent polls showing Republican front-runners Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson each leading Clinton by a statistically insignificant 46% to 45% margin. Clinton edges out Arizona Senator John McCain by two points in the latest polling.

While Obama and former North Carolina Senator John Edwards routinely outperform Clinton in general election match-ups, that does not necessarily mean they would be stronger candidates. It does mean that they are less predictable and at the moment have less people committed to voting against them. If either of those men won the Democratic nomination, they would have the potential to move up or down significantly in the court of public opinion between the time of their nomination and the general election. As a result, it is possible they could do better than Clinton and possibly win a majority of the vote on Election Day in 2008. It is also possible that they could do far worse than Clinton and suffer a larger defeat. See a summary of general election match-ups and other key stats for all Democratic and Republican Presidential candidates.

Polling for the first full week in August showed Edwards with 13% of the vote (just nine points behind Obama). New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, Delaware Senator Joe Biden, and Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich each attract support from 3%. Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd and former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel each are at the 1% mark and 10%% are undecided.

Current results are based upon nightly telephone surveys conducted on the seven days up to and including the night before posting. Results are based upon interviews with more than 1,300 Likely Democratic Primary Voters. The margin of sampling error for the weekly update is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

By Rasmussen Reports, August 8, 2007

CHICAGO - This was supposed to be John Edwards' chance to shine, with 17,000 union members eager to be impressed, especially by a presidential candidate who has been actively courting labor support ever since his failed vice presidential run in 2004.

But Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama used the AFL-CIO's Democratic presidential forum Tuesday night at Soldier Field to fend off their primary rivals hoping to move up in the polls, impress organized labor and maybe land an early primary endorsement.

"I thought the candidates left the forum in exactly the same condition they came in," said Marick Masters, professor of business administration with the Katz Business School at the University of Pittsburgh. "Clinton and Obama are still the front-runners. The race is still between them. I don't think Edwards got in any major hits in this stadium."

Edwards has long staked his campaign on the labor vote, telling the crowd that he has walked 200 picket lines in the past two years. At stake is a possible primary endorsement from the AFL-CIO, the nation's largest labor federation, or its individual member unions. Sen. John Kerry's 2004 candidacy got a major boost from the International Association of Firefighters, whose endorsement kept him in the race after favorites Howard Dean and Richard Gephardt flamed out in the early primaries.

Edwards and the others shot barbs at Clinton in front of a raucous crowd, hoping to score points. "You'll never see me on the cover of Fortune magazine," said Edwards, digging at Clinton, who was featured recently on the business publication's front. Obama said U.S. trade agreements have tilted against workers because "corporate lobbyists" have had too much influence, a theme he has developed in recent days, especially when alluding to Clinton.

Clinton mostly ignored her rivals, instead touting her ability to challenge Republicans. "For 15 years, I have stood up against the right-wing machine. And I've come out stronger," Clinton said to applause from the crowd. "If you want a winner who knows how to take them on, I'm your girl."

Democratic analyst Donna Brazile said Clinton did a great impression of playing Muhammad Ali during the debate, dodging and weaving as her rivals threw punches. "The other candidates are trying to take a piece of her but failed," Brazile said. "She can avoid the punches and still land some blows. That speaks volumes on why she's the front-runner."

Obama also took hits at the 90-minute debate. Sen. Chris Dodd chided him for recently suggesting he would strike terrorist targets in Pakistan if he had information about the location of al-Qaida terrorists, even without the permission of President Pervez Musharraf. "General Musharraf is no Thomas Jefferson," Dodd said, but he is an ally in the war on terror.

Clinton joined in, saying to Obama, "You should not always say everything you think when you are running for president, because it can have consequences."

Obama shot back: "I find it amusing that those who voted to authorize and engineer the biggest foreign policy disaster in our generation are now criticizing me."

Clinton and Obama played up their Chicago roots to the local crowd. The first thing Obama mentioned was that they were in the "home of the NFC champions, the Chicago Bears."

Clinton said her dad, a lifelong Bears fan, would consider that "any of his children would be on the 10-yard line in Soldier Field is an extraordinary accomplishment."

The wildest cheers were for Rep. Dennis Kucinich's applause lines aimed at the union crowd. While all the candidates leveled criticism at the 1993 North American Free Trade Agreement, which was enacted by former President Clinton, Kucinich said repeatedly he would withdraw from it and the World Trade Organization. "No one on stage could give you a straight answer, because they don't intend to scrap it," he said.

The true winner at the forum was the AFL-CIO, said Robert Bruno, a professor at the Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations at the University of Illinois at Chicago. It was originally scheduled for a downtown Chicago convention center but was moved to Soldier Field to handle the number of union families that wanted to attend. Union families filled the stadium's north end zone all the way out to the stage at the 10-yard line, wearing colorful union T-shirts and chanting their union's names before the forum. "I'm not aware of any political debate in the modern era that was in front of this many members of the same constituency," Bruno said. That all candidates but former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel attended "shows that there's still a lot of political relevance in the American labor movement. That's a pretty interesting statement to be making after all these years of centrist Democratic policies and moderate Democratic candidates."

While no one likely will garner an early primary endorsement from the AFL-CIO , the executive council was scheduled to meet Wednesday , endorsements from individual unions are prized plums that could break candidates out of the pack. Many unions plan to endorse after Labor Day if the AFL-CIO doesn't jump into the race.

Unions are important for the money and the foot soldiers they can provide candidates.

In the 2004 elections, organized labor gave $53.6 million to Democratic candidates and party committees, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. That amount increased to $66 million for the 2006 elections and is expected to increase again for 2008. The AFL-CIO , which has 55 member unions and represents 10 million workers , said in 2006 that it knocked on 8.25 million doors for union candidates, made 30 million telephone calls, distributed 14 million fliers and sent out 20 million pieces of mail in its successful efforts to help Democrats take the House and Senate.

By Jesse J. Holland, Associated Press, August 8, 2007

It fell shy of an endorsement, to be sure, but former House Speaker Newt Gingrich lauded Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton on Tuesday, saying those who think the New York senator can't run the White House are "just wrong."

"Senator Clinton is a very formidable professional. She works very hard. She has thought a long time about this," Gingrich told reporters at the National Press Club. "The suggestion that she would not be capable of this is just wrong."

Gingrich, a conservative Republican from Georgia who helped lead his party to control of both houses of Congress in 1994, was less definitive on whether he'll throw his hat in the presidential ring, saying he'd decide after an online governance clinic he'll host Sept. 27-29.

While Gingrich, 64, has yet to declare himself a candidate, he has eclipsed former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts to take the fourth-place position among prospective GOP candidates in a USA Today/Gallup Poll released Tuesday.

The poll showed 30 percent of a sample of Republicans favoring former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani as their candidate. Former Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee ranked second with 19 percent, trailed by Sen. John McCain of Ariz. with 14 percent.

Gingrich placed fourth with 10 percent, and Romney ranked fifth with 6 percent. The survey queried 406 Republican or Republican-leaning adults nationwide. It has a margin of error of 5 percentage points.

By Bob Deans, Austin-American Statesman, August 7, 2007

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- New York Sen. Hillary Clinton has notably widened her lead over her closest competitor in the 2008 Democratic presidential race, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, according to a new national USA Today/Gallup Poll released Monday night.

"[Voters are] taking a good hard look at all the candidates and concluding that Hillary has what it takes to be president and what it takes to take on the Republicans," wrote Mark Penn, a top strategist to the New York Democrat, in a memo to supporters Monday. "They know that Hillary Clinton has the experience and strength to bring about real change."

Clinton's boost could be the result of the two candidates' recent quarrel over one of Obama's answers at the CNN/YouTube Debate last month. Obama said he would meet with world leaders openly hostile to the United States during his first year as president, while Clinton said she would only do so after a set of preconditions had been agreed to.

Clinton later called Obama's answer "naive" -- a critique that may have struck a cord with her party's base. Democrats and Democratic-leaning Independents now significantly favor Clinton to handle terrorism, the Iraq war and relations with "nations that are unfriendly to the United States."

In addition to the latest USA Today/Gallup poll, two other recent national polls indicate a large gap between Clinton and Obama. A Newsweek poll suggests Clinton holds a 23-point lead, while the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll put the lead at 21 points.

In early primary and caucus states like New Hampshire and Iowa, however, some polls show Clinton, Obama and former Sen. John Edwards virtually tied. And other state polls show Clinton with a lead, but one far smaller than national surveys like the latest USA Today/Gallup, Newsweek and NBC News/Wall Street Journal polls.

The poll also measured a stable Republican race, registering former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani at 33 percent, former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson, not yet a declared candidate, at 21 percent, Arizona Sen. John McCain at 16 percent and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney at 8 percent.

The poll, conducted August 3-5, surveyed 490 Democratic leaning voters and 405 Republican leaning voters. It carries a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percentage points.

By Alex Mooney, CNN, August 7, 2007

When Michael A. Mingolelli pulled out his checkbook on June 25 and made a $500 pledge to Sen. John McCain, he was not thinking about the promise of a McCain White House. The financial and estate planner from Farmington, Mass., was thinking about keeping one of his best customers satisfied. "One of my dear clients asked me if I would help contribute and I said yes, even if I don't think McCain's going to win," Mingolelli said. "And to be honest, if it came down to McCain and Romney, I'd probably go with Romney," he added, referring to former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney (R).

The kind of solicitation directed at Mingolelli is not unusual as presidential candidates grow more reliant on their stables of "bundlers" -- well-connected supporters who can tap vast networks of associates for money and whose special status in a campaign is enshrined with such honorifics as "Ranger" (President Bush's 2004 reelection campaign) or "Hillraiser" (Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign).

The bundlers are under their own kind of pressure to produce for their candidates. And they pass it on -- corporate executives hitting up employees, real estate developers seeking checks from vendors and law partners prevailing upon less-senior lawyers. One sign of where this pressure -- direct and indirect -- is applied is the rising number of contributions from secretaries, administrative assistants and executive assistants for whom a $1,000 political contribution is a major expense. At this point in the campaign four years ago, 127 donors making contributions listed one of those three occupations. In the first six months of this year the number was 526, and the average check was for nearly $800.

"Almost everyone raising the big money these days will tell you: You start your fundraising network by thinking of people . . . who can't say no," said Clyde Wilcox, a Georgetown University professor who has studied the psychology of political giving. "They may not tell the person they have to give, or even imply it, but both of them know that's not true."

Democrat Bill Richardson, for example, the lone sitting governor in the 2008 presidential race, collected 274 contributions totaling more than $236,000 from New Mexico state employees. The outpouring ranged from $2,300 from Richardson's lieutenant governor, Diane Denish, to $150 from Alfred Newman, who identified himself as a state disability adjudicator when he made his donation June 29. Richardson spokesman Pahl Shipley described the number of New Mexico employees who donated as "a great show of support from the people who get the work done every day for this state."

The 2008 candidates have already collected $277 million -- more in the first six months of this year than candidates in the last presidential election cycle gathered during all of 2003. With the demand to find new sources of money, White House hopefuls have shifted their attention from the merely wealthy to the well-connected. They shower attention on those with the networking skills to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars in increments of $2,300, the legal limit. "All this has created intense pressure on folks to work the Rolodexes really hard and really beat the bushes," said Scott Thomas, a former Federal Election Commission chairman. "It's not unusual to expect circumstances where someone higher up is leaning on an employee to cough up money." And for the most part, it is not illegal, he said. The Federal Election Commission prohibits corporate executives or labor leaders from "facilitating" contributions from their subordinates. But that's as far as the language goes, he said.

In interviews, several first-time donors said they were asked by their bosses to write checks, but almost all said they considered their contributions voluntary. Pedro Canas, a chauffeur employed by the private equity firm TSG Consumer Partners in San Francisco, said he made his $2,300 donation to McCain (R-Ariz.) after a company official called him. "He asked me to help," Canas said. "I thought it would be a good idea. I thought, well, I could contribute." Laraine Agren, a marketing executive in Penn Valley, Calif., said she gave $500 to Romney because she "liked what he did during the Olympics." She had never made a contribution before and might "have done it anyway," she said, "but the president of my company asked me to."

Those who donate to please their bosses have always represented a slice of overall giving. Wilcox recalled a memorable fundraising moment when a corporate executive was holding an event for Jack Kemp during his 1988 Republican presidential campaign. The host told his guests: "Jack, make it short. These people are here for me." In 2003, Wilcox helped conduct a survey on congressional giving and found that among donors who contributed to advance their business interests, 12 percent noted that they had been "asked by someone they didn't want to say no to."

That dynamic has at times created a legal minefield for campaigns. In January 2003, for instance, an Arkansas law firm worked with staff members from then Sen. John Edward's campaign to plan two fundraisers. The firm's managing partner instructed his assistant to ask four other employees to make $2,000 contributions to the North Carolina Democrat and then to reimburse them, which is illegal. Edwards now circulates a three-page memo of guidelines to volunteer fundraisers, including a reminder in large print that the law "strictly prohibits reimbursement of contributions made by others."

Bundlers have become so ingrained in the fundraising process that some Web sites keep track of who they are. But Congress recently acted to create more transparency when the bundlers are lobbyists. Under the ethics legislation passed by both the House and Senate last week, members of Congress will have to disclose the names of lobbyists who bundle contributions of more than $15,000 for them.

But the pressure to give persists in all settings. Producers and agents flocked to events that movie mogul Steven Spielberg held earlier this year. Donna Bojarsky, a Hollywood political consultant, said those attending may already have been inclined to give. "But if the head of your studio is doing a fundraiser . . . I would think the people who work for that person would see it as a good idea to go."

When asked how he brought in money, longtime Atlanta fundraiser Kirk Dornbush joked: "You mean besides guns, knives and threats?"

Dornbush, the president of a medical research firm who is helping Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) raise cash for his presidential bid, acknowledged that he does turn to business associates -- " 'People I can rely on to help out' is how I'd put it." But he says Obama has made fundraising relatively easy. But while Obama, in particular, has seen a flood of money come in via the Internet, most of the candidates keep pace by pushing well-connected fundraisers into service. When former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani was designing his fundraising plans, for example, he looked for chief executives, top lawyers and bankers -- and even considered asking former Minnesota Vikings quarterback Fran Tarkenton to solicit contributions from pro athletes.

And whether those bundlers have dreams of an ambassadorship or an invitation to a White House dinner, or simply think that the candidate would make the best president, their fundraising targets are higher than ever. "The raisers at this point, because the pace is so accelerated, they really have to get creative," said Tracy Sturman, who served as Sen. Joseph L. Liberman's finance director when he sought the White House as a Democrat in 2004. She is not attached to a 2008 campaign. "They're reaching out to people who aren't traditionally givers," Sturman said. "But because the base of support is expanding so fast, people are scrambling to just find anyone who hasn't given yet."

The evidence that candidates and their supporters are working their connections can be abundantly clear on campaign finance forms. The phenomenon would explain, for instance, why 67 lawyers at the Texas location of Giuliani's law firm, Bracewell & Giuliani, donated a total of more than $100,000 to his campaign. Or how Fortress Investment Group, the firm where Edwards worked, became the source of 87 contributions totaling more than $150,000 for his presidential bid -- including checks that came not only from top executives but also from analysts and executive assistants. Several Fortress employees who contributed to Edwards in April declined to comment when contacted at their offices. Human resources director Michele Cohen said her $1,000 to Edwards was a "personal contribution that had nothing to do with Fortress" and added: "I can't say what other personal decisions my colleagues have made." For the most part, people who are asked to donate at work say they are doing so willingly. That is what Joanna M. Baricevic said when asked about the $4,200 that she and her husband gave McCain on Feb. 28. Baricevic, 64, is an executive assistant at Lehman Brothers; her husband is retired. And these were their first political gifts. Asked how she came to donate, Baricevic said: "Through my office. Many people here are involved in his campaign."

By Matthew Mosk, The Wsshington Post, August 7, 2007

But Clinton didn't flinch under the pressure from rivals. She spoke with ease and visible passion, shrugging off the attacks. "The other campaigns have been using my name a lot," she said with a sarcastic grin. "For 15 years, I have stood up against the right-wing machine and I've come out stronger," Clinton said with a rising voice. "So if you want a winner who knows how to take them on, I'm your girl," she said to loud applause.

Obama and Edwards also found themselves on the receiving end of some verbal punches. Senator Chris Dodd tweaked Obama for his recent suggestion that, if President, he might use unilateral force to go after Al Qaeda in Pakistan. In perhaps his strongest moment during the debate, an indignant Obama responded by saying: "I find it amusing that those who helped authorize the biggest foreign policy disaster in our generation are now criticizing me for focusing on the right battlefield instead of the wrong battlefield in the war on terror." Senators Dodd, Biden and Clinton all voted to initially authorize the war in Iraq.

Edwards, who has aggressively courted labor and taken a series of populist stances, found himself at time upstaged by Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich. Though the latter is only polling about 2% among Democrats, his progressive discourse deeply resonates among labor audiences. His promise to repeal NAFTA and to institute single-payer universal health care if elected president drew loud ovations.

Tuesday's debate, however, might have little impact on who labor finally decides to endorse. The AFL-CIO is expected to release its individual unions to endorse whomever they please, foregoing a unified rubber stamp. Clinton is almost a sure bet for the powerful AFSCME public employees union, the real center of political gravity inside the Federation. The auto workers might go with Edwards. Ditto for the Steelworkers.

Still undecided is the 1.8 million member Service Employees International Union, the motor force of American labor's rival federation known as Change To Win. SEIU has leaned heavily toward Edwards but also contains within ranks strong pockets of support for both Obama and Clinton. The SEIU meets next month to consider its own endorsement choices.

All of labor has been a tad gun shy this cycle, still trying to assimilate the bitter experience of 2004. Early on in that previous contest, both AFSCME and the SEIU came out for insurgent Howard Dean only to see him collapse in the Iowa caucuses. AFSCME quickly recanted and switched to Kerry. The SEIU stuck with Dean even after it was clear his candidacy was doomed.

So as labor contemplates its choices, it finds itself today confronted with the dilemma that anguishes a lot of Democrats: do you go with who you like? Or do you go with who you think you are going to win.

Nothing about Tuesday's debate seemed to change that dynamic.

By The Nation, August 7, 2007

CONCORD, N.H. - Presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton is calling for penalties on unscrupulous mortgage brokers who engage in predatory lending and a $1 billion federal fund to help homeowners avoid foreclosure.

She also wants an increase in affordable housing options.

"Everybody wants these (lending) organizations to be successful, but not at the cost of taking advantage of the consumer," Clinton told The Associated Press in advance of a speech planned Tuesday. "And the unfortunate fact is, many people have gotten into the mortgage market who are being exploited and abused by boiler-room mortgage-lending operations that are just like selling phony penny stocks or the old traveling salesmen with the snake oil."

Clinton has been critical of subprime mortgages, loans given to people with blemished credit histories or low incomes. Weak home prices and rising interest rates have made it increasingly difficult for borrowers to keep up with their payments; delinquencies and foreclosures are sharply rising.

On Monday, the nation's 10th largest mortgage lender, American Home Mortgage Investment Corp., filed for bankruptcy protection. Two other mortgage lenders said they were not accepting new applications. Falling home prices and a spike in payment defaults have scared investors away from mortgage debt, including bonds and other securities backed by home loans.

"Always, in a market the consumer or the borrower has to be responsible," Clinton said. "But on the other side, we don't want to have such an imbalance where the lender and the broker can take advantage of the consumer. "I'm trying to just get this back into a more even keel so that ... brokers know this isn't the Wild West and they've got to abide by some rules and provide fair and accurate information about what the real costs are."

Clinton said the markets are valuable, but should be balanced with fairness.

"The history of America is making sure that our markets work as well as they should by avoiding either anticompetitive efforts or having the market be stacked against the consumer," she said. "That's why we have consumer protection agencies. That's why we have banks and credit card companies and other financial institutions that have to abide by rules and regulations."

Clinton also will propose a $1 billion federal fund for local and state programs that help at-risk homeowners avoid foreclosures. She said those programs could help the "unsuspecting families" linked to unfair mortgages.

And she also planned to demand lenders remove early payment penalties attached to some mortgages. "It's part of the American ethos that if you can pay off your debts, you should be encouraged to do it," she said.

By Associated Press, August 7, 2007

According to USA Election Polls, Hillary Clinton is a good front runner not just because of her ability to elicit the support of her constituents, but because in her meteoric political rise to power in her own merit she is showing that she can play the game. This is accentuated by her ability to remain the leader of the pack - at least according to the poll numbers - in spite of some rather dirty campaign tricks by even her fellow democrats.

Yet in spite of it all it appears that Mrs. Clinton possesses the one ability that far too few properly credit her: she has the uncanny ability to make alliances. She is so adept at strategically picking those candidates that will help her in her quest for the Democratic Party Nomination that she could be a shoo in for Survivor or any other reality show that depends in large part on the cooperation of others.

While politics by many is regarded to be little more than Survivor set against the backdrop of Washington, D.C, with the coverage being as consistent as that of a star's hounding by the paparazzi, the former First Lady is once again cultivating her alliances in the field and keenly observant of the fact that should she receive the party's nomination, she will need to have a good relationship with the potential nominee for Vice President. The latter must help her make it or break with in Florida, New Mexico, and Pennsylvania. Planning ahead this far truly makes Hillary Clinton the perfect front-runner.

By Trans World News, August 7, 2007

The instant Barack Obama tossed his hat in the presidential ring the big knock against him was that he didn't know a darn thing about foreign policy. And that his greenhorn experience would sooner or later come back to haunt him once he squared off with the big boys and girls in the presidential debates. It has. A USA Today/Gallup poll shows that Obama has taken a sharp nosedive in the ratings in his overheated tiff with Hillary Clinton too grab the top Democratic spot. That was predictable.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton Tuesday proposed clamping down on mortgage lending abuses and providing more aid to families who face losing their homes.

The New York senator, on the campaign trail in New Hampshire, also proposed a $1 billion fund to supplement state programs that help homeowners catch up on mortgage payments, renegotiate loan terms or provide financial counseling.

She pressed for eliminating penalties for early repayment of mortgages, which are often associated with less traditional home loans to individuals who fall short of qualifying for prime loans and turn to more expensive subprime mortgages.

The proposals come as world markets have been see-sawing in reaction to problems in the U.S. subprime mortgage markets and rising defaults among less credit-worthy borrowers. Lenders in recent months have tightened their loan standards as a result.

"We can look at the statistics, wring our hands, and continue to do nothing, or we can do what America has always done in times of difficulty: acknowledge that we face a real challenge, and confront it head-on with real solutions," Clinton said.

The Bush administration has argued that the recent subprime mortgage market turmoil appeared to be contained and is not hurting the broader economy, but it is closely monitoring the situation.

"We need to help those facing the pain of foreclosure," Clinton said in a statement. "We need to secure the marketplace and put reforms in place right now."

Her proposal also includes requirements that mortgage brokers fully disclose their compensation to borrowers when they apply for a mortgage and require federal registration for mortgage brokers.

Additionally, Clinton said another $1 billion should be set aside to help state and local trust funds that help subsidize low-income housing. The New York lawmaker did not offer details on how she would pay for the programs if enacted.

Some lawmakers in Congress, including Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Chris Dodd, have been looking into overhauling regulations governing the subprime mortgage market, but no concrete proposals have advanced in the House or Senate.

By Reuters, August 7, 2007

While preparing to give a major critique of the war in Iraq read a draft of the speech and added a few lines of her own. last month, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton "I would also consider, as I have said before, leaving some forces in the Kurdish area to protect the fragile but real democracy and relative peace and security that has developed there," Clinton said in the final version of the speech. It was a small but important caveat in an otherwise harsh speech about ending the war -- overshadowed by repeated promises to withdraw troops as quickly and responsibly as possible.

Advisers close to Clinton (D-N.Y.), who confirmed that she personally inserted the lines, said it illustrated her approach to running for president these days -- as a deliberate practitioner of foreign policy, with an eye toward the general election and the realities of governing if she becomes president.

That has been the subtext of her fights with Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) in the past few weeks. Clinton called his willingness to meet with leaders of hostile states "irresponsible and naive" after the Democratic debate in South Carolina two weeks ago, then responded coolly to his statement last week that he would not use nuclear weapons against terrorist cells in Pakistan.

Refusing to say whether she agreed with him on the specific question, Clinton said she did not "believe any president sh