(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - There is no clear favourite among the Republican Party's United States presidential contenders in the Granite State, according to a poll by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center released by CNN and WMUR. 25 per cent of likely GOP voters would support former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney in next year's primary, while 24 per cent would back former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani.

Arizona senator John McCain is third with 18 per cent, followed by actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson with 13 per cent. Support is lower for Texas congressman Ron Paul, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, Kansas senator Sam Brownback, California congressman Duncan Hunter, and Colorado congressman Tom Tancredo.

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 20 per cent, former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 12 per cent, and New Mexico governor Bill Richardson with six per cent. Support is lower for Delaware senator Joe Biden, Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich, and Connecticut senator Chris Dodd.

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, September 30, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Hillary Rodham Clinton is the most popular United States presidential contender for Democratic Party supporters in the Sunshine State, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. 47 per cent of likely Democratic primary voters in Florida would vote for the New York senator in next year's primary.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 22 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 11 per cent. Four per cent of respondents would vote for other candidates, and 15 per cent are undecided.

In the sample of Republican Party supporters, former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani is first with 29 per cent, followed by actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson with 23 per cent-up six points since August. Arizona senator John McCain is third with 12 per cent, followed by Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney with 11 per cent, and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee with three 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 : Polls & Research, September 29, 2007

The top three Democratic presidential contenders are locked in a three-way race among likely Iowa caucus-goers, according to the latest NEWSWEEK Poll-while Romney leads his Republican rivals in the Hawkeye State.

Sen. Hillary Clinton holds a double-digit lead over her rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination in many national polls. But in Iowa, home to the January 2008 caucus that is the first major event of the electoral season, the Democratic race is much tighter, according to the latest NEWSWEEK Poll. Among all Iowa Democrats surveyed, Clinton enjoys a 6-point lead over her nearest rival, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama. But among likely Democratic caucus-goers, she is locked in a three-way race with Obama and former North Carolina senator John Edwards, with Obama enjoying a slight edge.

Meanwhile, the NEWSWEEK Poll found that former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney has emerged as the top choice among Iowa's GOP voters-well ahead of former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani, who leads in most national polls. But Romney's religious beliefs could pose a problem; less than half of all Republicans in the state (45 percent) think the country is ready to elect a Mormon president (35 percent do not).

With less than four months to go before the caucuses, both races still appear quite fluid. While Romney is the first choice of 24 percent of likely GOP caucus-goers, none of the Republican candidates comes close to commanding the support of a majority of GOP voters surveyed. And Clinton appears to be the only Democrat with strong support from her party's registered voters.

Among all Iowa Democratic voters, Clinton draws 31 percent, followed by Obama (25 percent) and Edwards (21 percent). But among likely caucus-goers, Obama enjoys a slim lead, polling 28 percent to best Clinton (24 percent) and Edwards (22 percent). Bill Richardson is the only other Democratic candidate to score in the double digits (10 percent).

Still, the poll suggests that Clinton's supporters may be the strongest of the pack. A majority of her boosters (55 percent) say their support is "strong," edging Obama (41 percent) and Edwards (37 percent). Neither Clinton's gender nor Obama's race seem to be a sticking point for Iowa Democrats; 94 percent of voters say they would be willing to vote for either a female candidate or a black candidate. But only two thirds think the country is ready to elect a woman (63 percent) or African-American (66 percent) president.

Clinton's record on Iraq may be affecting her support in Iowa. Likely Democratic caucus-goers are split: 22 percent say her record on the war makes them more likely to vote for her; 21 percent say it makes them less inclined. But it's clear that her husband, former president Bill Clinton, is an unalloyed asset. Eight in 10 (79 percent) Democratic likely caucus-goers say it would be good for the country to have him back in the White House as First Gentleman (12 percent do not).

On the other side of the aisle, Romney, who has reportedly spent $2.7 million on television time in the state, has emerged as the Republican front runner both statewide and among likely caucus-goers. He enjoys the support of a quarter (24 percent) of the GOP's likely caucus-goers, followed by Fred Thompson (16 percent), Giuliani (13 percent) and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee (12 percent). Arizona Sen. John McCain polled just 9 percent.

Still, Romney's support is hardly ironclad. Twenty-six percent of Iowa Republicans who support him do so "strongly." Giuliani's backing is even softer (22 percent of his backers support him "strongly"). Four in 10 (39 percent) of Thompson's boosters say their support is strong.

Romney's reputation is positive among Hawkeye State Republicans; 55 percent of all GOP voters have a "mostly favorable" view of him (13 percent have a "very favorable" view). Fifty-nine percent of the narrower group of likely GOP caucus-goers have a "mostly favorable" view of Romney, while 19 percent have a "very favorable" view of him. But less than half of them (45 percent) think the country is ready to elect a Mormon president. Although 57 percent of Iowa Republican voters surveyed say they are "somewhat familiar" with the Mormon religion (16 percent say they are "very familiar"), 54 percent consider Mormons to be Christians. (Evangelical Christians make up 42 percent of likely GOP caucus-goers in the state, according to the poll, and 45 percent of Republican voters overall.)

Three quarters of likely GOP caucus-goers (77 percent) view Romney as a politician who can get things done and more than half (55 percent) suspect he can affect needed change. Allegations that he is a "flip-flopper" have stuck with a quarter (24 percent) of likely caucus-goers; 58 percent do not think he flip-flops too often.

Abortion remains another issue of significant importance to Iowa voters, according to the poll. A majority of Republicans (61 percent) and about half of all Democratic voters (47 percent) say abortion will be one of several issues they will consider when casting their vote. But a small minority of both Republican voters (6 percent) and Democratic voters (4 percent) consider it the single most important issue. Giuliani, who has come under fire from conservatives for being insufficiently pro-life, appears to be the candidate whose support is most affected by his stance on abortion. The former mayor gets 26 percent support among Iowa Republican voters who say it's not an important issue, compared with just 11 percent from those who say it is.

By Brian Braiker, Newsweek, September 29, 2007

WASHINGTON - Former Sen. John Edwards tried to deny the obvious the other day when he announced he would accept public financing for his 2008 presidential campaign, and challenged his well-heeled principal rivals, Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, to do the same.

On the eve of the next quarterly report to the Federal Election Commission of the candidates' fund-raising, Edwards acknowledged that he will fall farther behind Clinton and Obama in the money chase. But he insisted that fact had nothing to do with his decision.

In taking the federal subsidy, Edwards must agree to limit his spending overall and in the various states, putting him at a distinct disadvantage with the two Democratic frontrunners. So he is goading them to follow suit, ostensibly in the interest of cleaner politics.

Earlier this year, Edwards surprised the political community with his ability to take in millions. Then, he was toying with the idea of rejecting the federal subsidy available under campaign finance law not only for the primaries but for the general election as well, if he got that far. Now he thinks he can persuade voters who pay attention to such matters that he is taking Uncle Sam's dollar transfusion on principle, while daring the others to do likewise. The notion is laughably transparent.

Like most struggling political candidates trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, Edwards told CNN: "This is not about a money calculation. This is about taking a stand, a principled stand, and I believe in public financing." Claiming he has enough money to wage a serious campaign with the limited federal subsidy, he noted that Clinton had said earlier that she is for public financing, so she should "step forward and show she actually means it."

Edwards insisted that he wasn't trying to be "holier than thou" in suddenly defending public financing, saying, "I myself thought early in this campaign about the possibility of not taking public financing." But on the campaign trail, he said, he was hearing repeatedly from voters "how worried they are about the way the system is functioning."

He apparently was referring to this election cycle's record-shattering fund-raising by Clinton and Obama, a competition in which he energetically entered and collected an impressive $23 million from January to June this year, but was eclipsed by their take of more than $50 million each.

In an interview with Larry King on CNN in late January, after saying he supported "mandatory public financing of all of our campaigns (because) we need to get the money out of politics," Edwards said until that happened he would raise as much as he could to compete with the others, rejecting the public money. Edwards' about-face decision now to take the limited federal funds, and opt out of what is being called "the money arms race," makes him the second 2008 presidential candidate who was an early participant in that race to confront financial reality.

In the competition for the Republican presidential nomination, Sen. John McCain, the early frontrunner in the polls, also raised money at a furious clip early this year. But he spent it so rapidly, even as his fund-raising fell off sharply, that he too decided he would have to accept the federal money - and the cap on spending that goes with it under the campaign finance law aimed at reducing the influence of money in politics.

After an early spurt in Iowa that propelled Edwards into the lead in the polls in that first caucus state, he has been going more aggressively on the attack against Clinton, especially for her vote to authorize use of force in Iraq. When he was in the Senate, Edwards did the same, but since then he has said flatly he was wrong and has become an outspoken critic of the war.

At the same time, his claim to be the anti-poverty candidate has been undermined by accusations of personal extravagance, throwing him on the defensive. His campaign is hardly in flame-out mode, but trouble signs are obvious.




By Jules Witcover, The Salt Lake Tribune, September 29, 2007

WASHINGTON (AP) - Barack Obama may be the first sitting member of the Congressional Black Caucus to run for president in more than 30 years yet rival Hillary Rodham Clinton has the edge in endorsements among the group.

With the backing of California Rep. Diane Watson this week, the Clinton campaign counts 13 supporters in the 43-member group to Obama's 12. Although technically since Obama is a member and supporting himself, one could say they are tied.

The endorsements reflect the split of black voters, with the two candidates competing for their support. The only other sitting CBC member to run for president was Rep. Shirley Chisholm of New York, a founding member who ran in 1972.

Clinton and Obama appeared Friday before the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation's annual legislative conference, and both got enthusiastic receptions.

Rep. Sanford Bishop, D-Ga., a CBC member who has endorsed Obama and was there to see him speak, attributed Clinton's endorsement lead to the greater number of members from Clinton's New York state as opposed to members from Obama's Illinois.

"It's a favorite son, favorite daughter issue," Bishop said. "Both of them are very attractive candidates to the African-American community.... Bill Clinton was extremely well-liked and loved by a large number of people in the country, particularly African-Americans."

The home state advantage isn't that great. There are four CBC members from New York endorsing Clinton - Yvette Clark, Gregory Meeks, Charles Rangel and Edolphus Towns - and three from Illinois endorsing Obama - Danny Davis, Jesse Jackson Jr. and Bobby Rush.

According to the Clinton campaign, she also has been endorsed by Reps. Corrine Brown, Kendrick Meek and Alcee Hastings of Florida; Donna Christensen of the U.S. Virgin Islands; Emanuel Cleaver of Missouri; Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas; Laura Richardson of California; and Stephanie Tubbs Jones of Ohio.

Obama also has the endorsements of Reps. Sanford Bishop and Hank Johnson of Georgia; Lacy Clay of Missouri; John Conyers of Michigan; Elijah Cummings of Maryland; Artur Davis of Alabama; Keith Ellison of Minnesota; Al Green of Texas; and Gwen Moore of Wisconsin. The list was provided by the Clinton campaign and the Obama campaign did not dispute its accuracy.

John Edwards' campaign says it has the backing of four CBC members — G.K. Butterfield and Melvin Watt of North Carolina; Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas; and Albert Wynn of Maryland.

By Nedra Pickler, Associated Press, September 28, 2007

Pandering to the interests of specific voting blocs is a common tactic for candidates seeking the presidential nomination of either party. During the 1992 Democratic primaries, Sen. Paul Tsongas famously pulled out a stuffed animal and accused Gov. Bill Clinton of being a "pander bear."

But in the race for the 2008 nominations, pandering has sunk to new lows--especially on the Republican side.

Mitt Romney has unabashedly reinvented himself in his bid for the GOP nomination. In Massachusetts, he ran as a Northeastern liberal Republican. In his failed bid to unseat Ted Kennedy in 1994, Romney declared that the gay and lesbian community "needs more support from the Republican Party," and said that the question of same-sex marriage should be left to the states to decide.

In his successful 2002 gubernatorial campaign, Romney supported domestic partnership status for gay as well as straight couples in Massachusetts, supported the federal assault weapons ban, and said that "the choice to have an abortion is a deeply personal one. Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not the government's."

Romney did what was necessary to win in liberal Massachusetts, and in so doing he sounded like a Democrat. Now, claiming to have experienced an "epiphany," Romney has flipped 180 degrees. He's recast himself for 2008 as staunchly pro-life, as a varmint hunter, and as an opponent of gay rights who now supports a Constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. Romney isn't just running against his GOP rivals, he's running against himself, circa 2002.

Rudy Giuliani's positions as Mayor of New York were not dissimilar from Romney's as Governor of Massachusetts. Both were "Rockefeller Republicans." Indeed, the only way a GOP candidate could win in Massachusetts or New York City was to be pro-choice, pro-gay rights and anti-gun. The problem is that, at the national level, these are not "politically correct" Republican positions.

But the thrice-married ex-mayor has so far taken a different tack than Romney. Rather than renouncing or conveniently forgetting his previous positions, he states them up front and seems willing to let the chips fall where they may.

At least, up to a point. Rudy tempers his pro-choice record by bizarrely promising to appoint judges who disagree with his own position on abortion. And last week he went before the National Rifle Association and declared his newfound belief in the Second Amendment's individual right to bear arms.

Giuliani was attempting to ingratiate himself with people he previously denounced as extremist. In justifying his federal lawsuit against firearms manufacturers in 2000, Mayor Giuliani wrote that the gun industry "profits from the suffering of innocent people." The Republican mayor publicly supported Bill Clinton's assault weapons ban, and called the NRA "extremist" in a 1995 TV interview.

Rudy does deserve credit for looking NRA members in the eye and acknowledging that he still has some differences with the organization. And after enumerating his law and order credentials, he reminded the group of Ronald Reagan's famous dictum, "If you're my 80 percent friend, you're not my 20 percent enemy."

If Giuliani sticks with this (relatively) gutsy approach, he may win the grudging respect of some conservatives. Only time will tell if, once the going gets tough, he too reaches an "epiphany" and abandons outright his previously held positions.

John McCain has the opposite problem--he can't seem to get credit for his conservatism. The four-term Arizona senator has a staunchly pro-life and pro-gun voting record, and he is the hawk of hawks on Iraq. But his "maverick" image and some of his more iconoclastic political positions have always made social conservatives queasy. In 2000, it was McCain-Feingold; for 2008, it's his approach to immigration reform. And while McCain opposes same-sex marriage, he takes a "federalist" position on how to address it--let each state decide on its own, rather than pass a federal law or amend the Constitution. That doesn't garner him many points, either.

But even McCain hasn't been immune to the pander bug. After getting trounced in the 2000 South Carolina primary, where Bush supporters used a variety of underhanded smear tactics, McCain took on Christian conservative leaders with a strong dose of his "straight talk."

"Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance," McCain said in a seminal speech in February 2000, "whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right."

Fast forward to the 2008 campaign, and McCain seems to have eaten his words as he seeks the Christian conservative vote. He telegraphed this new approach in May 2006, when he gave the commencement address at Liberty University--the institution founded by the late Jerry Falwell, one of McCain's "agents of intolerance."

Meanwhile, the more genuinely "authentic" social conservatives like Mike Huckabee and Sam Brownback are getting little traction with the Republican base. As for Fred Thompson, despite his solid conservative voting record in the Senate and national recognition as an actor, his much-hyped candidacy has yet to take off in Iowa or New Hampshire.

Of course the Democratic candidates pander to their own special interest groups on the left. But not even Hillary Clinton, with her changing positions on the war, has needed to perform the ideological contortions of some of her Republican counterparts.

Republican primary voters may be thinking more about "electability" than whether a candidate is sincerely and authentically "conservative." But regardless of one's views on gay rights, abortion, or gun control, blatant and perhaps cynical repositioning by major candidates should make voters pause.

By Pierre Atlas, Real Clear Politics, September 28, 2007

To date, the storylines of the two presidential primary contests have been totally divergent.

The Democratic contest has been noteworthy for its stability. The field went through something of a shockwave early this year after it became clear that Barack Obama was indeed going to run, but since the start of the summer almost nothing has changed.

Hillary Rodham Clinton continues to lead in national polling and has even widened her margins in surveys conducted over the past few months. In Iowa, Clinton, Obama and John Edwards are running roughly even, while -- if a new independent poll is to be believed -- Clinton has moved into a commanding spot in New Hampshire. South Carolina, at the moment, appears to be a two-way race between Clinton and Obama.

The Republican nomination race, where fluidity is the name of the game, couldn't be more different. An argument can be made for either Rudy Giuliani or Mitt Romney as the frontrunner, while Fred Thompson remains a major factor in the contest.

So fluid is the Republican contest that writing off any of the candidates -- including Mike Huckabee and John McCain -- may well be premature. Make no mistake: The Fix believes the GOP nominee will come from the current top tier of Giuliani, Romney and Thompson. But this race has been so unpredictable (who could have imagined McCain would have fallen from the first tier so rapidly) that we hesitate to make hard and fast predictions.

THE DEMOCRATS

1. Hillary Rodham Clinton: Clinton is doing a lot of things right lately, but the one we've noticed the most is the use of her husband as a campaign tool. He has become not just a validator of what kind of president she would be but a foil of sorts for her when she needs one. Take Wednesday night's Democratic debate. Confronted by moderator Tim Russert with the fact that she and her husband disagree on torture as a means of extracting information, Clinton deadpanned: "Well, he's not standing here right now." That moment effectively established Clinton as her own woman. Later, asked whether it was a good thing for someone with the last name of "Clinton" or "Bush" to be on every presidential ticket since 1980, Clinton quickly praised her husband's administration, daring any of the other candidates on stage to raise the less savory aspects of the Clinton years on their own. None did. (Previous ranking: 1)

2. Barack Obama: Obama's campaign hit a rough patch over the past month, a development exacerbated by the fact that Clinton seems to be soaring at the same time. But the fundamentals of the race still look promising for Obama; he continues to raise scads of cash and has built huge organizations in early states like Iowa and New Hampshire. Plus, he doesn't need to peak right now; his campaign would prefer an Obama surge in late December when it really matters. Still, a listless debate performance on Wednesday night didn't help Obama's cause, and the fact that he has spent $3 million on television ads in Iowa without moving his poll numbers in any significant way is somewhat worrisome. (Previous ranking: 2)

3. John Edwards: Edwards has his populist pitch down pat and seems more willing and able to draw distinctions with Clinton than Obama. We continue to be surprised about the staying power of Edwards's support in Iowa, and it now looks like it will be a three-way horse race in the caucuses. Just when momentum seemed to be building for Edwards, he announced late yesterday that he would accept public financing for both the primary and the general election -- a potentially self-defeating move. Not only will Edwards face spending caps in early states, he will also be unable to begin spending general election money until he officially became the party's nominee at the national convention. Assuming the identity of the party nominees is decided by mid-February (at the latest), Edwards would have to endure seven months with little to no money to spend. His campaign is casting it as a proactive decision -- he truly believes in reforming the campaign system. But no matter the reasoning, it complicates the electability argument Edwards has been trying to make for months. (Previous ranking: 3)

4. Bill Richardson: Richardson is betting heavily that his plan to remove all American troops from Iraq will be the silver bullet that turns the Big 3 to the Big 4. It's as good a bet as any for a candidate who, while he continues to raise solid sums of money and run a competent national campaign, just can't find a way to break through. Richardson's new ad in New Hampshire is a blatant appeal to the netroots in hopes that this influential constituency will adopt Richardson and his Iraq proposal in the closing months of the campaign. The big question for Richardson is if he does find a way into the top tier, can he possibly withstand the press scrutiny that comes with it? He's shown a penchant for malapropisms and misstatements during the campaign that might have disqualified him if he was already considered a top tier candidate. (Previous ranking: 4)

5. Chris Dodd: We (again) thought about putting Joe Biden in this spot -- due in large part to his continued ability to win endorsements from Iowa state legislators and his decision to make a major commitment to winning the caucuses. But we're still not convinced that Biden will have enough money to be in position to take advantage of a slip from one of the leading Democratic candidates. That's where Dodd comes in; he continues to cast himself as the candidate in the field who doesn't just talk the talk but has walked the walk in the Senate over the past three decades. It also can't hurt Dodd's cause among the netroots to know that Markos Moulitsas (founder of the DailyKos blog) voted for the Connecticut senator in the most recent monthly poll on the site. Plus, Dodd should have enough money to play seriously in Iowa. That's good enough for the fifth spot on The Line this month. (Previous ranking: 5)




By Chris Cillizza, The Washington Post, September 28, 2007

Senator Hillary Clinton now enjoys a five-point lead over Mayor Rudy Giuliani in the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. It's Clinton 48% and Giuliani 43%. The former First Lady also leads former Senator Fred Thompson 48% to 41%.

Both match-ups represent gains for the Democratic frontrunner. But the more modest lead, over Giuliani, is also the more dramatic news.

Two weeks ago, Clinton held a statistically insignificant one-point lead over Giuliani. Prior to that, Clinton had held an advantage over Giuliani only once in fourteen consecutive Rasmussen Reports polls.

Giuliani began the year with the advantage in this match-up, but Clinton has gained ground in the latter part of the year. And Clinton has had a particularly good week, getting an often-generous reception for her recently announced health care plan. On Health Care, voters currently trust Democrats more than Republicans by a wider margin than on any other issue.

Senator Clinton also continues to enjoy a very healthy lead in the national Democratic nomination race. Recent polls in the early Primary States of New Hampshire and Florida show her lead growing in both places.

A good showing with primary voters doesn't always translate to clearly greater success in general-election match-ups. But it seems to be happening this week for the senator.

Looking ahead to the general election, Senator Clinton also holds at least nominal leads over Republican hopefuls in the generally GOP-leaning states of Arkansas, Virginia, Tennessee and Florida.

Clinton has been ratcheting up her advantage over Thompson in each of the last three polls of the match-up. Two weeks ago, Clinton led Thompson by five. Two weeks before that, she held a four-point edge. And, two weeks before that, in early August, she held a three point advantage over the man from Tennessee. During June and July, Clinton and Thompson were essentially even in national polling.

Hillary Clinton is now viewed favorably by 52%, unfavorably by 46%. These numbers equal her highest favorables and lowest unfavorables in our polling since November. However, throughout the year, Clinton's numbers have rarely strayed more than a point or two from an equal number of favorable and unfavorable ratings.

Senator Thompson is now viewed favorably by 43% and unfavorably by 37%. A fifth of all voters have no definite opinion of him. Last week, 45% offered a favorable assessment of the actor/politician.

Giuliani is viewed favorably by 49%, unfavorably by 45%, a low for the year. This marks the second straight week that Giuliani's favorable ratings have been below the 50% mark.

This national telephone survey of 800 Likely Voters was conducted by Rasmussen Reports September 24-25, 2007. The margin of sampling error for the survey is between +/- 3.5 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

Rasmussen Reports, September 28, 2007

TRENTON - The two front-runners in the presidential race got more good news from New Jersey as the second poll in less than a week found them maintaining sizable leads against their nearest opponents.

The Fairleigh Dickinson University-PublicMind Poll finds former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani with 48 percent support among Republicans and New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton with 46 percent of Democrats' support.

On the Republican side, Giuliani's closest rival is former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson with 12 percent. Among Democrats, Clinton's closest competitor, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, has 19 percent.

The poll, released Friday, mirrors Wednesday's Quinnipiac University survey. That poll had Giuliani leading Thompson 45 percent to 12 percent. It had Clinton ahead of Obama 46 percent to 15 percent.

"New Jersey voters know Clinton and Giuliani, and that name recognition makes them the automatic favorites,'' said Dan Cassino, a political science professor at Fairleigh Dickinson and a survey analyst for PublicMind. "The race here is really theirs to lose.''

The telephone survey of 701 New Jersey voters was conducted Sept. 17-23 with a sampling error margin of plus or minus 4 percentage points. The survey includes 220 Republicans with a sampling error margin of plus or minus 7 percentage points and 345 Democrats with a sampling error margin of plus or minus 5 percentage points.

The Associated Press, September 28, 2007

After months of rising above all expectations, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) just can't seem to close the gap with Hillary Clinton. His strengths are finally counterbalanced by his weaknesses, his inexperience, his multiple political personas and his strong opponent, all of which have stopped him dead in his tracks.

In July, Obama offered to sit down for tea with a who's who of the world's dictators, and followed it up by suggesting that we might bomb our ally Pakistan to get Osama bin Laden. These comments played into voters' fears that Obama lacks experience and that he would be thrust onto the world stage without the proper preparation. Mitt Romney had the best line, accusing Obama of having "gone from Dr. Strangelove to Jane Fonda in one week."

But more importantly for the Democratic nomination, Hillary Clinton hit Obama's softball out of the park. She rightly noted that she would not be used by dictators for propaganda purposes. She portrayed herself as a steady hand at the ship of state. And over and over again, on domestic and foreign policy, she has found ways to emphasize her long history in the political arena.

She has even made a virtue out of the failure of her 1993 healthcare plan. When John Edwards carped that Clinton's new healthcare plan was a copy of his, she brushed his criticism away with the back of her hand--"Been there, done that," she said, putting Johnny-come-lately Edwards in his place.

In addition to his lack of experience, Obama has become entangled in his two political personae. Until recently, Obama had been able to successfully portray himself as both the most vociferous anti-war candidate and as the apolitical, above-the-fray leader of a new generation. At times he is heir to Howard Dean's netroots campaign, and at other times he wrings his hands about the partisan bickering in Washington.

These two messages appeal to younger voters who are against the war and more likely to be politically independent than older voters. Often, however, the passion of anti-war activists and the distaste for partisan politics are at odds.

Trying to balance these concerns, Obama played it too cute when he decided to skip last week's vote condemning MoveOn.org's ad against Gen. David Petraeus. All of the Democratic candidates for president were in a difficult spot because the ad was grossly unfair, but none of them wanted to irk MoveOn and risk the accusation of being soft in their opposition to the war. Half of the Senate Democrats voted to condemn the ad, but Hillary Clinton voted against the resolution. In a tortured explanation of his missed vote, Obama argued that it is "this kind of political game-playing that makes most Americans cynical about Washington's ability to solve America's problems. By not casting a vote, I registered my protest against this empty politics."

But by trying to have his cake and eat it too, Obama came across as calculating and political, not above politics. Voting on the substance, he should have condemned the ad; voting on the politics, he should have stuck with Clinton and MoveOn.org, but his halfway house did him no good.

Unfortunately for Obama, while he has been having problems, Hillary Clinton has become the candidate of the voters who want change and of those who want experience. Her appeal is back to the future.

The vast majority of polls since Aug. 1 have shown Clinton with 40-something percent and Obama with 20-something. Obama is treading water. His remarkable ascension in Democratic politics has been halted, and unless something changes, all he'll have is the consolation prize of first runner-up.

By John C. Fortier, The Hill, September 26, 2007

MANCHESTER, N.H. -- The latest University of New Hampshire poll came at an inauspicious, but perhaps useful, moment for Barack Obama. Coming on the eve of Wednesday's Democratic debate at Dartmouth College, the survey highlighted the degree to which his campaign badly needs a booster shot.

Obama is moving in the wrong direction--or at best not moving. Having entered the presidential campaign to great promise, he has yet to deliver fully on his potential. Watching Obama on the campaign trail is like watching an enormously gifted athlete, but one who seems to be holding something back until the moment the competition demands more. For Obama, that moment has arrived.

For the sake of comparison, look back to the contest between Al Gore and Bill Bradley eight years ago. Gore was the Hillary Clinton of that race--the favored front-runner, the candidate of the party establishment, the politician with the bigger network. Bradley was that year's Obama, the insurgent whose appeal for a different kind of politics struck a nerve among Democratic elites and independent voters--particularly in New Hampshire.

Gore began that race with a huge lead, both nationally and in New Hampshire, but by this time eight years ago, Bradley had nearly caught the front-runner in New Hampshire. Over the course of the summer of 1999, Bradley narrowed the then-vice president's margin from 45 points to 40 points. A UNH poll for WMUR-TV and CNN put Gore on notice that he wasn't going to win the nomination without fighting for it. Gore readjusted his campaign, took the fight to Bradley and eventually won.

The opposite has happened in the Democratic race this year. By all rights, New Hampshire ought to be one of the most fertile of the early states for Obama's candidacy. All polling shows that Obama's greatest strength is among better-educated, wealthier Democrats and among independents. The electorate here fits that profile. Education levels are higher than in other early states and the size of the independent vote here gives Obama a built-in audience for his new politics message of change.

But instead of closing in on Clinton, Obama has allowed her to use the summer months to widen her advantage over him and the rest of the Democratic field. What was a 9- percentage-point margin for Clinton over Obama in July has grown into a 23-point lead in September.

The poll suggests that Clinton's campaign time here has improved her image. Although she runs a distant third behind Obama and John Edwards on the question of who is the most likable candidate, she is now seen among Democrats almost as favorably as her two leading rivals. In April, the gap between those who viewed her favorably and those who viewed her unfavorably was 40 points; today it is 62 points.

On two other issues, who is the most electable and who has the experience to be president, Clinton has increased her advantage. More than half of those in the UNH-WMUR-CNN survey (54 percent) said she was the most electable in 2008. Just 13 percent cited Obama. Almost half (47 percent) said she has the right experience, while just 8 percent named Obama.

More discouraging for Obama was the question on who can bring needed change to the country. This is fundamental to Obama, the basis of his candidacy and the core of his message. He has crisscrossed the country arguing that the only way to deliver on universal health care or energy independence or an end to the war in Iraq is by changing the way Washington works. That, he tells his audiences, is as much about them as it is about him. If they mobilize behind his candidacy, together they can change the country.

The new poll shows the degree to which that message has not broken through. Asked who could best deliver change, 37 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents cited Clinton, 25 percent named Obama.

One poll is just that -- one single snapshot of a much more complex dynamic. Other polls may well show a somewhat closer race in New Hampshire. Even this poll showed fluidity in the Democratic electorate, with more than half (55 percent) said they were still trying to decide for certain for whom they'll vote in January.

That means that, while Clinton has a big lead here at the moment, events and performance by the candidates can still have a substantial effect on the eventual outcome. For Obama, Clinton and Edwards, that means the race here is far from over. But for Obama in particular, the results almost demand an acknowledgement that he needs something more than he has been doing.

What that is will be the subject of intense debate inside his campaign. Should he attack Clinton--and risk damaging his image as someone who would rescue the country from slash-and-burn politics? Can he persuade those Democrats still making up their minds that Clinton presents a bigger risk to the party as its nominee than he does? Should he try to make his candidacy even more about his initial opposition to the war in an effort to draw a stark distinction with Clinton, even though there is little evidence to date that such a strategy offers great hope for success?

At its heart, the question for Obama is as clear today as it was when he joined the race last winter. Can he persuade voters that he has the right combination of freshness, toughness and judgment to sit in the Oval Office?

Obama has won hearts all over the country -- demonstrated once again today at a big rally in Peterborough in southwest New Hampshire -- with the promise of something different. But that promise needs to be filled in something more concrete. That is not an easy thing to do, as he has found over the course of many months. But to cross the ultimate threshold, he will need to find a way to do so -- starting soon.

By Dan Balz, The Washington Post, September 26, 2007

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

THE NUMBERS - DEMOCRATS

Hillary Clinton, 46 percent

Barack Obama, 15 percent

Al Gore, 11 percent

John Edwards, 7 percent

Joe Biden, 3 percent

Dennis Kucinich, 1 percent

Bill Richardson, 1 percent

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

THE NUMBERS - REPUBLICANS

Rudy Giuliani, 45 percent

Fred Thompson, 12 percent

John McCain, 8 percent

Mitt Romney, 6 percent

Newt Gingrich, 4 percent

Ron Paul, 3 percent

Mike Huckabee, 2 percent

Associated Press, September 26, 2007

Hillary Clinton may blunt one of rival Barack Obama's few advantages in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination: money.

As the campaigns press donors with predictions that their candidate is losing the fund-raising race, both Clinton and Obama are set to report about $20 million in donations during the third quarter, which ends Sept. 30, according to campaign officials and fund-raisers.

A failure to out-raise Clinton would deprive Obama of the momentum he needs to overcome his rival's significant leads in national and key state polls. Obama raised $33 million to her $27 million in the second quarter and ended up with more cash on hand for the primary elections. His campaign had aimed to be able to outspend her significantly in the last part of 2007 and early next year.

"The Clinton juggernaut is moving if she out-raises him this quarter,'' said Peter Fenn, a Democratic consultant who isn't affiliated with any candidate this year. "It makes the argument for her winnability an easier one.''

A comparatively strong haul for Clinton would allow her to minimize Obama's argument that his larger list of donors reflects a broader appeal to voters. Obama's Web site says he has more than 340,000 contributors. Clinton said she had more than 100,000 in a Sept. 23 interview on NBC. She wouldn't comment further at a news conference the next day.

While the totals may change as the candidates continue to raise cash this week, political giving typically slows in the third quarter as would-be donors take summer vacations and grow weary of requests for money. The fourth quarter often picks up again ahead of the first nominating contests in January.

Maximum Donations

Both campaigns said they had tapped new sources of cash. More of Obama's donors made small donations in the first and second quarters, making them available for repeat requests. By contrast, 70 percent of Clinton's donors had offered up the maximum $2,300 for the primary elections by the end of the second quarter, the Washington-based Center for Responsive Politics said. Many have also given $2,300 for the general election, which Clinton, 59, can spend only if she wins the nomination. Obama, 46, points to his donors as evidence that his message is resonating. "Everybody's talking about the kind of money we raised,'' Obama said in a speech to labor leaders last month in Iowa. "We raised it the old-fashioned way -- $5, $10, $25.''

Recruitment

Clinton's lead in the polls and strong performance in candidate debates is helping her with donors and fund-raisers, said Clinton supporter and former Democratic National Committee Chairman Steve Grossman.

"Even people who are grudging in their approval for and respect for Hillary have to admit that she's run an outstanding campaign,'' Grossman said.

Obama fund-raisers and campaign officials said their candidate would have plenty of money to compete in the primaries and that national polls don't reflect his competitive standing in early nominating states such as Iowa. "He gets better and better on his feet,'' said Obama fund- raiser James Torrey, chief executive officer of New York-based Torrey Associates.

Former North Carolina Senator John Edwards, the third-place contender in the Democratic race, is pushing to raise $1 million on the Internet in the last 10 days of the quarter. His campaign declined to comment on his fund raising other than to say he is on track to reach his goal of bringing in $40 million before the first contests. Edwards, 54, raised $23 million in the first half, about half as much as Clinton and Obama.

Republicans

Strategists expect Obama, an Illinois senator, and Clinton, a New York senator, to keep winning the money race in comparison with the Republicans. They will be watching to see whether former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, 63, or ex-Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, 60, brings in the most in their field and whether former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson, 65, who entered the race this month, can compete financially.

This quarter's report will also show whether former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, 52, has been able to capitalize on his second-place finish in a Republican straw poll in Iowa in August. The campaign of Arizona Senator John McCain, 71, will get a chance to prove he has been able to recover after fund- raising fell short in the first half and he burned through almost all the cash he raised.

Officials at the Republican campaigns declined to comment on fund-raising totals or didn't return calls.

As they prepare to file their third-quarter reports by Oct. 15, the campaigns are engaging in a time-honored tradition: hyping an adversary's strength. Both Clinton and Obama backers have said publicly that they expect their rival's campaign to raise more than $30 million in the third quarter, a figure no expert takes seriously.

By Jonathan Salant & Kristin Jensen, Bloomberg, September 26, 2007

At the risk of suggesting the unimaginable to the unimaginative, the Democrats who would like to unscrew the "Reserved for Hillary Clinton" plaque from the party's 2008 presidential nomination might want to work overtime tonight.

If Clinton's challengers check their calendars, they will perhaps note that this evening's debate at Dartmouth will be the first serious forum of the fall. In barely three months, perhaps less, grassroots Democrats will begin participating in the caucuses and casting the primary votes -- in Iowa or New Hampshire or Michigan or Florida or some other pretender to "first-in-the-nation" status -- that will quickly seal the deal.

Clinton is not the preferred candidate of the majority of Democrats nationally or in most of the early caucus and primary states. But Democrats have a tendency to nominate candidates they don't like. This has something to do with political calculus; remember the passionless decision of 2004 Iowa caucus goers to back John Kerry because he "looked like a winner."

Clinton has run a smart, efficient and generally mistake-free campaign and that appeals to discouraged Democrats. Clinton's strength also has something to do with her genuine appeal to certain sections of the party base -- especially young women and some communities of color. But, make no mistake, Clinton is not the ideological soul-mate of the average Democrat.

On most major issues, she stands well to the right of Democrats and independents.

Fortunately, all of Clinton's opponents for the nomination (with the possible exception of the lamentable Joe Biden) stand to her left.

Unfortunately, all of Clinton's opponents for the nomination (with the possible exception of the lamentable Joe Biden) stand to her left.

It is certainly good that there are Democratic contenders such as Barack Obama, who is arguing for more diplomacy and reconciliation in the world and at home; John Edwards, who is striking populist chords; Bill Richardson, who is saying its time to bring all the troops home from Iraq; Dennis Kucinich, who is speaking to legitimate fears about the administration's seeming determination to make war with Iran; Chris Dodd, who has spoken up well and wisely on a number of Constitutional issues; and Mike Gravel, who reminds us that we should fear candidates who speak casually about using nuclear weapons.

But, while those appeals may well attract more than 50 percent of the Democratic vote, the raw numbers favor Clinton.

Consider the latest poll from New Hampshire. According to the survey conducted by the University of New Hampshire for WMUR and CNN, Clinton is at 43 percent. That's a seven point hike since July for the New York, suggesting that she's got the momentum that matters a good deal at this point.

Obama is at 20 percent, and slipping; Edwards is at 12 percent; Richardson is at 6 percent. Kucinich is at 3, as is Biden. Dodd's at 1. So is "Other," which is one point better than Gravel.

Eleven percent of likely Democratic primary voters remain undecided.

If this scenario continues, the headline from New Hampshire come January -- or, perhaps, December -- will likely read: "Clinton Sweeps First Primary."

Any candidate who would prefer another headline might want to say something meaningful -- or inspiring, or simply distinguishing -- tonight. We really are reaching the point where there will not be that many more opportunities.

The Nation, September 26, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Many Democratic Party supporters in the United States want Hillary Rodham Clinton as their presidential nominee next year, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. 39 per cent of respondents would back the New York senator in a 2008 primary.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 25 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 14 per cent. Support is lower for New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, Delaware senator Joe Biden, and Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich.

On Sept. 23, Kucinich discussed his foreign policy views, saying, "What we're offering is a whole new vision for America. Not peace through strength, but strength through peace. (...) If we believe war is inevitable, then war is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If we believe in peace, it can happen."

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, September 25, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Rudy Giuliani is the most popular presidential contender for Republican Party supporters in the Golden State, according to a poll by the Public Policy Institute of California. 22 per cent of respondents would vote for the former New York City mayor in next year's primary.

Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney and actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson are tied for second with 16 per cent, followed by Arizona senator John McCain with 15 per cent. Support is lower for California congressman Duncan Hunter, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, Colorado congressman Tom Tancredo, and Texas congressman Ron Paul.

In the sample of Democratic Party supporters, New York senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is first with 41 per cent, followed by Illinois senator Barack Obama with 23 per cent, and former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 14 per cent. Support is lower for Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich, New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, and Delaware senator Joe Biden.

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.

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, September 25, 2007

"The only answer to this entire set of circumstances is public financing," the New York senator said during an appearance on ABC's This Week. "The cost of campaigns … and all the things that people have to do in a modern campaign are just out of control."

Clinton, who has pledged to return $850,000 raised by Hsu, said her campaign was among about two dozen that failed to detect a 15-year-old outstanding arrest warrant against Hsu.

Clinton and several leading candidates decided not to seek public funding in 2008, freeing them to raise unlimited private dollars. Clinton has raised $53 million, not including $10 million transferred from her Senate campaign account. Only her Democratic rival, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, has raised more: $58.6 million.

Clinton, who leads national polls for the Democratic nomination, appeared on five Sunday talk shows, where she also touted her new health care plan.

In the interviews, Clinton also:

- Said she would apply the lessons learned from her failed 1993 health plan to achieve "quality, affordable coverage for everyone." Her new plan would require Americans to buy health insurance but allow them to keep what they have. Federal taxpayers would spend $110 billion annually to help pay the costs.

Republicans, who have rejected proposals for universal health care, last week criticized Clinton's approach. Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, for instance, called it a "socialized medical plan." On Sunday, Clinton hit back, saying, "I'm waiting for any Republican candidate to come out with a plan that can be really scrutinized."

- Reiterated calls for a withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. Clinton said that if elected, she would expect to use U.S. forces there for "limited missions" - specifically, to combat al-Qaeda in Iraq, train the Iraqi army and protect Kurds. She declined to say how many troops it would take to accomplish that. "I don't know what I'm going to inherit," she said in the ABC interview.

By Fredreka Schouten, USA Today, September 24, 2007

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton said Sunday she won't vote for any more money to support the four-year-old war in Iraq without a plan to start bringing U.S. troops home.

"I've reached the conclusion that the best way to support our troops is begin bringing them home," the New York senator and former first lady told CNN's "Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer."

"I don't believe we should continue to vote for funding that has an open-ended commitment, that has no pressure on the Iraqi government to make the tough political decisions they have to make, or which really gives any urgency to the Bush administration's diplomatic efforts."

Clinton's declaration comes as the Senate debates the Defense Department's 2008 spending authorization bill. It follows her vote against a $120 billion war-spending bill in May, when Congress dropped a call for the withdrawal of American combat troops by March 2008 after President Bush vetoed a bill containing that provision.

"The president has no intention of changing his policy in Iraq," she said. "He's now talking about leaving it to his successor."

Meanwhile, the Senate's Republican minority routinely filibusters Democratic proposals to wind down the war, which is costing the Treasury about $10 billion a month and has claimed the lives of nearly 3,800 American troops. May's spending bill made continued U.S. support contingent on a set of benchmarks for Iraq's government. But the Iraqis met only 11 of the 18 benchmarks, according to the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress.

"Even those who are implementing this policy of the president's cannot tell us it will make America more safe, nor that it will lead to the kind of political decision-making that we have to expect from the Iraqis themselves," Clinton said.

Nearly two-thirds of the American public now opposes the war, according to a CNN-Opinion Research poll conducted in early September.

Clinton said, if elected president, she would end the conflict "as quickly and responsibly as I can," but said some U.S. forces would likely remain as trainers, to protect Americans and to battle Islamic militants loyal to al Qaeda.

The two-term senator, who leads her Democratic presidential rivals by a double-digit margin in national polls, made the rounds of all five Washington talk shows Sunday.

Last week, Clinton supported two amendments that would have forced the Pentagon to begin a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq.

But she said Sunday that even if Democrats muster enough Republican support to break a filibuster -- something they have been unable to do -- Democrats would still be unlikely to get the two-thirds vote needed to override a presidential veto.

"The answer for this is, let's elect more Democrats in 2008," she said. "That will help solve the problem."

CNN, September 24, 2007

WASHINGTON - The International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers endorsed Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton for president Monday, saying she had the best chance to win.

"Hillary Clinton has the strength and experience to deliver the change America needs," union president John J. Flynn said. "After years of an administration that has turned its back on working families, we need a president whose priorities are our priorities."

Flynn said the union's executive council voted unanimously to endorse Clinton and that the New York senator was the clear winner in a poll of members.

Clinton said she was honored. "In my administration, America's working families will again have a partner in the White House," she said.

Founded in 1865, the bricklayers say they are the oldest continuous union in North America and that they represent about 100,000 skilled masonry-trowel tradescraft workers.

This is Clinton's fifth union endorsement, the most of any presidential candidate so far.

Meanwhile, one of the largest municipal jail unions in the country said Monday it would endorse Democratic Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois for president. The endorsement would be Obama's first from a union. "Barack Obama is the one candidate who will put an end to the divisiveness in this country so that we can finally achieve greater economic prosperity for the working class and health care coverage for all Americans," said Norman Seabrook, president of the New York City Correction Officers' Benevolent Association.

The group has about 9,000 active members.

Obama said, "It's an honor to have the endorsement of these men and women who put themselves at risk every day to serve on the front lines of our nation's criminal justice system."
Obama also offered support to the striking United Auto Workers, who walked off the job at General Motors plants around the country Monday. This is the first nationwide strike against the U.S. auto industry since 1976. "The demands the union is fighting for - job security, the health benefits they were promised - are things that all workers should expect and that UAW members deserve," Obama said in a statement. "General Motors owes it to the UAW to come back to the bargaining table so that union members can go back to work."

At a Capitol Hill news conference, Clinton said the Bush administration has neglected the needs of the auto industry. "There is a role for presidential leadership," she said, adding that the leaders of the Big Three automakers had for years sought a meeting with the White House. "They were rebuffed repeatedly. Finally there was a meeting that occurred with no follow-up," said Clinton.

Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards also blamed the White House for the problems that led to the strike. "Sadly, the issues on the bargaining table between General Motors and the United Auto Workers are not unique to Detroit - they represent the larger failures of Washington and public policies that have weakened unions and the middle class," Edwards said.

By Jesse J. Holland, Associated Press, September 24, 2007

President Bush is predicting that Hillary Clinton will win the 2008 Democratic presidential primary, according to a new book, 'Evangelical President,' set for release on Monday and written by FOX News contributor Bill Sammon.

Breaking his rule not to talk about presidential politics, Bush told Sammon, who writes for The Washington Examiner, that he thinks the New York senator will defeat Barack Obama in the Democratic presidential primaries, but will fall to the Republican nominee.

"She's got a national presence and this is becoming a national primary," Bush said. "And therefore the person with the national presence, who has got the ability to raise enough money to sustain an effort in a multiplicity of sites, has got a good chance to be nominated."

"I believe our candidate can beat her but it's going to be a tough race," the president said.

It has been difficult for Bush to remain silent about the 2008 president race, despite his promises not to be the "prognosticator in chief." He has been talking about the race and handicapping candidates during off-the-record chats with visitors to the White House.

After excerpts were released, the White House did not challenge Sammon's account. "Frankly, it's difficult to not talk about the '08 election a lot," White House press secretary Dana Perino said. "There's a lot of interest in it and it does have consequence." She denied the notion that Bush was talking up Clinton's prospects in order to energize the Republican base against her candidacy. "The bottom line is, it really doesn't matter what the president thinks about who will win the Democratic primary," Perino said. "There's going to be a showdown at the OK Corral and they'll figure out whose going to be the nominee and from there the president will campaign vigorously for the Republican candidate.

On the Republican side, Bush has expressed surprise that former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani remains the front-runner despite his liberal positions on social and cultural issues normally critical to the party base, according to The Washington Post. It ran a story about Bush's recent off-the-record chat with television news anchors and Sunday show hosts. Bush said Giuliani's popularity was a sign of how important the terrorism issue is to Republican voters, the newspaper said. It said Bush cautioned against ruling out Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., saying he had managed to revive his campaign after an implosion earlier this year.

FOX News, September 24, 2007

The Hillary Clinton who appeared on five Sunday morning shows was a formidable political candidate: poised, polished, knowledgeable. The package she presented was designed to send a message to her Democratic rivals: catch me if you can.

She now sits atop the Democratic field, in a tier by herself. She has achieved that by performing at a consistently high level in debates and on the campaign trail, along with help from a campaign that has been largely free of major mistakes. She showed Sunday she could stand in against some of the best pitching in political journalism.

Clinton's goal has been to surround her candidacy with an aura of inevitability, which is certainly common among front-runners. The more she can do that, the more she puts the focus on whether her rivals have a strategy to stop her. The more she does that, the less focus there will be on questions pertinent to what kind of general election candidate or president she actually might be.

The rush to anoint Clinton as an inevitable nominee overlooks the history of nomination battles, which is that few candidate win these contests without a struggle or without at least one serious setback or stumble -- either self-inflicted or inflicted by the voters. What happens before the voters are heard from is not unimportant, but it is rarely decisive.

What could trip up Clinton? Many things: a scandal, a mistake or an unexpected event -- although mistakes seem the least likely given what has transpired to date. The most likely is a defeat and that certainly appears most possible in Iowa. A Clinton loss in Iowa would instantly change perceptions of the Democratic race and bring new scrutiny to Clinton's candidacy that may be overlooked right now.

Iowa is the outlier in the polls at this point in the campaign. Clinton holds a sizeable lead in national polls, and she has, on average, double-digit leads in the other early states. But in Iowa, the polls show a three-way contest that also includes Barack Obama and John Edwards -- and what happens in Iowa and New Hampshire will affect all the other states.

Iowa's electorate is notoriously picky about its choices. The voters there demand considerable attention and, even when they get it from the candidates, wait until the last minute to make up their minds. Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin believes more than half the likely Democratic caucus voters have not settled on a candidate. Advisers to the leading candidates say the percentage may be even higher than that. No matter what the polls show elsewhere, Iowa is a real battleground.

An Obama victory in Iowa would deal a serious -- though not fatal -- setback to Clinton. Although Clinton has a lead in New Hampshire today, Obama has a potentially receptive electorate in New Hampshire because of the sizeable number of independents who are likely to vote in the Democratic primary. If Obama were to win both Iowa and New Hampshire, Clinton then would be in deep trouble.

An Edwards victory over Clinton in Iowa would present a potential obstacle to her nomination, but perhaps not one as significant as if Obama were to win Iowa. That's because Edwards did not do well in New Hampshire in 2004 and has struggled there this year. Knowing that, he and Elizabeth Edwards have been investing more time and resources in New Hampshire, but no one can say with any confidence whether it could pay off if he wins Iowa.

Clinton is acting as if her whole campaign depends on Iowa -- and it may. She has rebuilt her ground operation there. She has used Iowa as the venue for major speeches on Iraq and health care to position herself favorably for the Democratic electorate. Twice now she has brought in her husband to campaign across the state with her. She and her advisers believe a victory there could secure her nomination. They also know that a loss there would scramble what has so far been generally smooth march forward.

What happens next depends in part on her opponents. She and the other Democrats will assemble in New Hampshire for a two-hour debate on Wednesday night (9-11 p.m. on MSNBC), moderated by NBC's Tim Russert. That event likely will reveal how they intend to try to stop her.

Obama may be forced onto the attack, if only to shake up a race that has been largely unchanged for months. Or he may try to avoid direct confrontation awhile longer, hoping that Edwards assumes that role immediately. Last week's debate in Iowa also found Joe Biden and Chris Dodd willing to challenge Clinton on the key question of whether she is the strongest Democratic standard-bearer in the general election and the kind of politician who could accomplish big things as president.

At some point, the voters will face up to those questions more directly than that have. Whether that will be during the primaries or, if Clinton is the nominee, after she has effectively wrapped up the nomination, depends in part on what the New York senator's opponents decide. But after the week she just wrapped up -- her most dominating week of the campaign to day -- her rivals must be ever more aware of the consequences of not doing so.

By Dan Balz, The Washington Post, September 24, 2007

WASHINGTON -- -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton reinforced her position as the Democratic presidential front-runner Sunday as she executed the rare feat of appearing on all five major TV talk shows in one morning, defending her new healthcare proposal and vowing to oppose any Iraq war funding unless it is tied to starting a U.S. troop withdrawal.

"I will not vote for any funding that does not move us toward beginning to withdraw our troops, that does not have pressure on the Iraqi government to make the tough political decisions that they have, that does not recognize that there is a diplomatic endeavor that has to be undertaken," the New York Democrat said on "Fox News Sunday." President Bush plans to ask Congress this week for nearly $200 billion to fund the war through the end of next year.

Clinton -- who holds a 22-point lead over her closest rival, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, in the latest national Gallup Poll on the Democratic presidential field -- did not criticize her opponents for the party nomination. Instead she focused on her general-election prospects, highlighting her success in winning Republican and independent votes in her two Senate races.

"Anyone who gets the Democratic nomination is going to be subjected to the withering attacks that come from the other side," Clinton said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "I think I've proven that I not only can survive them but surpass them."

Appearing on "Fox News Sunday" for the first time in more than three years -- and almost exactly a year after former President Bill Clinton had an angry confrontation on the show with host Chris Wallace over attempts in the 1990s to capture Osama bin Laden -- the senator laughed loudly when asked why she and her husband "have such a hyper-partisan view of politics."

"Well, Chris, if you had walked even a day in our shoes over the last 15 years, I'm sure you'd understand," she said. "But you know, the real goal for our country right now is to get beyond partisanship, and I'm sure trying to do my part, because we've got a lot of serious problems that we're trying to deal with."

Clinton took to the airwaves Sunday after unveiling her long-awaited healthcare proposal, the American Health Choices Plan, last week. It would require everyone to have medical insurance and would offer tax credits to those who can't afford it. Half of the program's $110-billion-a-year price tag would come from savings she says she can squeeze from the current healthcare system, which she calls bloated and inefficient. The rest would come largely from repealing tax cuts for those earning more than $250,000 a year.

"It is not only a moral imperative that we try to cover everyone, it is now an economic necessity," she said on "Meet the Press."

Clinton dismissed criticism from Republican presidential candidate Rudolph W. Giuliani that her healthcare plan amounted to "socialized medicine." She said it created no new federal bureaucracy and addressed a crucial problem. "I'm waiting for any Republican candidate to come out with a plan that can be really scrutinized, that we can ask hard questions about," she said on ABC's "This Week." "It seems as though they're in the 'just say no' category, and I don't think that's good for the country."

But Iraq was the focus of much of the interviews. Clinton again defended her 2002 vote authorizing the use of military force against Iraq. Many antiwar activists have called for her to apologize for that vote. "I cast a sincere vote based on my assessment at the time, and I take responsibility for that vote," she said on "Meet the Press."

She continued: "It's fair to say that the president misused the authority that he was given, and if I had the opportunity to act now based on what I know now, I never would've voted that way."

Clinton also would not directly criticize the liberal group MoveOn.org for its recent full-page ad in the New York Times referring to Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the U.S. commander in Iraq, as "General Betray Us." Republicans condemned the ad, and Bush said Democrats were afraid to criticize the group because of its liberal clout. "I don't condone attacks by anyone on the patriotism and service of our military," Clinton said on CNN's "Late Edition." "But let's be clear here. This debate should not be about an ad. This debate should be about the president's failed policies."

Asked on CBS' "Face the Nation" whether her husband would have a policy role if she is elected president, Clinton responded, "No. No." "Among the many lessons that I have learned, we want to be sure that the president, my husband, does whatever he can, just as I tried to do whatever I could, and I think he has a very special and important role in reaching out to the rest of the world," she said.

Appearing on all five major Sunday talk shows -- the political equivalent of hitting for the cycle in baseball -- is known among TV producers and political operatives as a "full Ginsburg," after the first person to pull it off, Southern California attorney William H. Ginsburg. He made the circuit on Feb. 1, 1998, in defense of his client Monica S. Lewinsky, the onetime White House intern at the center of a Bill Clinton sex scandal. Ginsburg had to scurry from studio to studio that day; Clinton taped her appearances from her home in Chappaqua, N.Y.

Only high-profile guests in the midst of major news events have the cachet for the five-show circuit. Those who have done it include then-vice presidential nominee Dick Cheney during the 2000 Republican convention; Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, then the Democratic vice presidential candidate, during the 2000 Florida recount; and then-Secretary of State Colin L. Powell during a nuclear weapons showdown with North Korea in 2002. Giuliani and then-Rep. Rick Lazio (R-N.Y.) also did it in 2000 in their race against Clinton for the Senate.



By Jim Puzzanghera, Los Angeles Times, September 24, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton holds a slight advantage in a potential United States presidential contest against Republican Rudy Giuliani, according to a poll by RT Strategies for the Cook Political Report. 45 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator, while 43 per cent would support the former New York City mayor.

On Sept. 20, Giuliani discussed his views on fiscal policy, saying, "Over time we can figure out how to eliminate (the Alternative Minimum Tax). If we were going to eliminate it, though, we'd have to balance it with additional tax cuts. That might be by making the Bush tax cuts permanent."

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

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Rudy Giuliani is the most popular United States presidential contender for Republican Party supporters in Florida, according to a poll by American Research Group. 26 per cent of likely GOP primary voters in the Sunshine State would vote for the former New York City mayor in next year's primary.

Arizona senator John McCain is second with 18 per cent, followed by actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson with 16 per cent, and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney with 14 per cent. Support is lower for former House of Representatives speaker Newt Gingrich, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, Texas congressman Ron Paul, California congressman Duncan Hunter, and Kansas senator Sam Brownback.

In the sample of Democratic Party supporters, New York senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is first with 47 per cent, followed by Illinois senator Barack Obama with 19 per cent, and former North Carolina senator John Edwards with nine per cent. Support is lower for Delaware senator Joe Biden, New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich, and Connecticut senator Chris Dodd.

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 : Polls & Research, September 23, 2007

DES MOINES - As summer turns to fall, the presidential race is heating up: Candidates are swinging elbows in debates, flaying each other in speeches and siccing newspeople on their party rivals. The question is which candidate takes the next step -- airing the first negative TV advertisement of the 2008 campaign.

"We've seen swiping and sniping," said media analyst Evan Tracey. "The natural progression is to take that to the airwaves and put it in an ad." But it's not that straightforward. Although voters may assume that negative campaigning is the natural order of things -- birds fly, fish swim, politicians wrestle in mud -- the launching of an attack ad is one of the most difficult and important tactical decisions a campaign can make. With the balloting in the presidential nominating race less than four months off and the holiday season looming, the timing has become even more acute.

In a two-person race, a negative spot runs the risk of backfiring, damaging a candidate as much as or more than it does the intended target. The dynamic is trickier in a crowded contest like the presidential primaries. The cycle of attack-and-response can lead to the political equivalent of murder-suicide, killing off the candidates fighting on the airwaves while benefiting those not engaging.

Examples abound, including the 2004 race, when Democratic Iowa front-runners Howard Dean and Richard A. Gephardt turned the state's airwaves into a free-fire zone and finished third and fourth, respectively, killing their White House hopes. There were other reasons that contributed to their poor showing -- Dean, for one, turned in a lackluster debate performance just days before the vote -- but the lesson most political professionals took away was "that Iowans are so nice they'll punish anyone who brings negativity into the race," said a strategist for one Democratic hopeful. "So that's having a real influence on people's thinking this time." (Most campaign insiders agreed to talk about negative advertising only on a not-for-attribution basis, so they would not associate their candidate with such tactics.)

The calculations are especially fraught for a handful of top-tier candidates. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York on the Democratic side and former New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani on the Republican side are already seen as combative, polarizing figures; lashing out on the airwaves might feed that. For his part, Democratic Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois has railed against the politics of negativity and division -- something the Clinton camp is quick to point out anytime he is critical of the former first lady.

So given the downside, why put out a negative ad in the first place? Because elections are about choices, and to make a choice voters need to compare and contrast. A glossy, self-promotional advertisement -- the type that front-running candidates typically air -- may offer only part of the story. "Somebody is not going to tell you about the bad issue positions they've taken in the past," said a strategist for one of the leading GOP candidates. "So you have to bring it up for them."

And, hopefully, bring a rival down in the process.

The presidential campaign ads so far have been mainly of the feel-good sort -- a blur of candidates shaking hands, hugging supporters, speaking resolutely. Cuddly children abound, and there is lots of red, white and blue.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has aired the most TV advertising, about $6 million worth, mostly in Iowa and New Hampshire, according to TNS Media Intelligence's Campaign Media Analysis Group, which Tracey runs. On Wednesday, Romney began airing a spot chastising fellow Republicans and urging the GOP "to put our own house in order" by reining in spending, cracking down on illegal immigration and tightening the party's ethical standards. "It's time for Republicans to start acting like Republicans," Romney said. "It's time for a change, and change begins with us." The rest of the GOP field has spent relatively little or nothing on TV advertising.

On the Democratic side, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson has spent about $1.4 million, Obama about $1 million and Clinton and Sens. Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware and Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut a few hundred thousand dollars apiece, according to Tracey. Again, most of the spending has been in Iowa, which is to hold the first vote of the presidential race.

For all the importance of one-on-one campaigning in the early states, and for all the time spent in debates and candidate forums, TV advertising remains by far the most effective way of reaching voters. Candidates can verbally jab each other onstage in debates or speeches, but that doesn't have the same effect as criticism leveled in a 30-second spot. "Only a small fraction of voters will watch any given debate or read any one newspaper article," said Jim Jordan, a Dodd strategist. "That simply isn't the same as reaching every caucusgoer in Iowa with a charge they will see 10, 12, 15 times in a TV advertisement."

Campaign consultants dislike the term "negative advertising" as much as voters profess to loathe the nasty spots that campaigns sometimes produce. The preferred term is "comparative advertising," and those who make their living in politics draw a distinction between attacks on a candidate's personal character or integrity and advertising that points out substantive differences. They presume people watching at home do the same thing.

"Voters are very open to information about candidates in a comparative way," said an ad maker for one of the leading White House contenders. "The yardstick is whether they seem fair and factual. At the end of the day, while voters say they hate negative ads and find them distasteful, it is clear they often get information they use in making up their minds."

Still, given the risks -- of a voter backlash, of sullying a candidate's own image, of curdling Christmas -- perhaps this will be a primary season in which all of the contestants stick to positive themes and no one says anything bad about their primary opponents, at least on TV. Don't hold your breath.

"At the end of the day, politics is a goal-oriented game with a deadline," said a veteran of several primary fights. "If you're running out of time and feel like you've got to change the game, people will do what they have to do."




By Mark Z. Barabak, Los Angeles Times, September 23, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Hillary Rodham Clinton has extended her lead in the national race for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination in the United States, according to a poll by Harris Interactive. 46 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in a 2008 primary, up three points since August.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 25 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 14 per cent. Support is lower for former U.S. vice-president Al Gore, Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich, New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, and Delaware senator Joe Biden.

On Sept. 21, Obama vowed to create more opportunities for senior citizens, saying, "I believe that Americans of all age are still willing to serve this country in ways big and small. I think the problem is no one has asked you. That will change when I am president."

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

As a working young professional who has not had health-care coverage for three years, I am delighted to learn about Hillary Clinton's health care plan.

Health care is one of the most critical issues in this presidential campaign. Hillary addresses all three critical aspects of our health-care system: cost, quality and access. Her plan allows Americans the choice of preserving existing coverage or changing their coverage. It provides tax relief to those who can't afford health care.

More important, as the documentary Sicko addressed with the interviews with insurance companies having to meet a quota of denying coverage to 10 percent of applicants, Hillary's plan ensures that no American (regardless of medical history) is denied coverage.

Many people argue that this a "socialist" health-care plan, but it's not. It is not like the national health-care systems of the U.K., Canada or France. Having lived in the U.K. for two years, I wish it could be. But in the United States, where individual choice is at a premium, we aren't there yet.

Hillary's plan still protects consumer choice. She will end the unfair practice of denying coverage, make coverage more affordable and scale back costs of prescription medicines.

For small businesses where health care is hard to afford for every employee, she is proposing the creation of a small business tax credit.

Hillary is the best person to execute a desperately needed new health-care plan that promotes shared responsibility of individuals, providers, employers and the government and re-establishes this country's sense of communitarian spirit!

By Jessica Mead, Concord Monitor, September 23, 2007

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has built double-digit leads over her chief rivals for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination in four of the five major party preference contests in January.

With three months to go before the start of the caucus and primary season, Mrs. Clinton has pulled away from her top challengers in all but the Jan. 14 Iowa caucuses, where she leads by a slim 2.6 percent average in the latest polls.

If her large leads hold up in later contests, it would send her into the "Super Duper Tuesday" battles on Feb. 5 with significant momentum and a strong chance to capture the bulk of the delegates at stake in more than 20 states.

According to polling averages tracked by the Real Clear Politics Web site, the New York senator now leads in the Jan. 15 Michigan primary by 16 percent, the Jan. 22 New Hampshire primary by 20.5 percent, the South Carolina primary by 11.3 percent and the Florida primary by 25 percent. The South Carolina and Florida primaries are Jan. 29.

Mrs. Clinton's near-prohibitive leads in the January contests are reflected in her double-digit advantage in the national voter surveys as measured by the Gallup Poll.

"Gallup's latest poll finds Hillary Clinton maintaining the better-than-20-percentage-point lead for the Democratic Party's 2008 presidential nomination that she has enjoyed since early August," the polling organization reported late last week.

A compilation of all the major national polls conducted this month gave Mrs. Clinton an average spread of 18.8 percent over her three top rivals, according to Real Clear Politics. A breakdown of the polling data showed that among Democrats, she now leads with an average of 41.8 percent, followed by Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois with 23 percent, former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina with 14.3 percent and Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico with 3.7 percent.

Despite Mrs. Clinton's substantial leads in the early primaries, as well as in the national rankings, election analysts have begun questioning whether she can win the general election because of the very high negative feelings she generates.

" 'Can Hillary Clinton win?' That is one of the most common questions in American politics these days," veteran campaign analyst Charlie Cook wrote in last week's National Journal. "Clinton, the Democratic front-runner, is widely derided as 'too polarizing,' " Mr. Cook said.

In trial heats against Republican front-runners, Mrs. Clinton has narrowly edged out former New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani in some matchups, but he has led her in others. A recent CNN/Opinion Research poll showed Mrs. Clinton with a 13-point lead over former Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee, and a four-point lead over Mr. Giuliani, for a statistical tie.

By Donald Lambro, The Washington Times, September 23, 2007

WASHINGTON, Sept. 22 - Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton has consolidated her early lead in the Democratic presidential contest, showing steady strength as the candidates head toward the first voting early next year.

She has been challenged for fund-raising supremacy and news media attention by Senator Barack Obama of Illinois. Former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina beat her to the punch in introducing big policy proposals. But nothing that her main rivals have done has so far has derailed Mrs. Clinton, leading them to begin rolling out aggressive new strategies aimed primarily at her, including courting black voters in South Carolina and stepping up attacks.

She has maintained solid leads in most national polls. And while polls in early voting states like Iowa and New Hampshire are of limited value in predicting the outcome, they too show her more than holding her own entering the period in which primary voters begin to make up their minds.

"I think they've run a great campaign," David Axelrod, Mr. Obama's senior adviser, said of Mrs. Clinton, of New York. "She's been a very disciplined candidate. They've been deft in trying to get ahead of this tidal wave of people out there who really want change. They are doing the best they can with it."

But Mr. Axelrod, pointing to what he saw as Mrs. Clinton's foremost vulnerability, said: "The question is ultimately, Is she credible - whether people buy her as an agent of change in Washington. If they do, she'll do well."

A senior adviser to Mr. Edwards, Joe Trippi, said: "You used to be able to say the front-runners - her and Obama - but I don't think that's the case anymore. It's pretty clear that she has sort of pulled away."

Mr. Obama is moving to deal directly with what his advisers said continued to be his weaker flank - concerns about his experience - with a burst of television advertisements that began this week in Iowa and will continue next week in New Hampshire. Mr. Edwards, trying to shake things up in a race where most of the attention has been focused on Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama, has started what aides say will be an escalating series of attacks on Mrs. Clinton.

Both Mr. Obama and Mr. Edwards face tough decisions in the weeks ahead.

They see the same path to victory - which includes turning the contest into a two-person race with Mrs. Clinton - but are concerned that attacks on one another would only end up helping her. Mr. Obama's decision to address the experience issue so directly came despite the concern of some associates about inviting new attention to a weakness. And Mr. Edwards's decision to tackle Mrs. Clinton could have the unintended effect of helping Mr. Obama in states like Iowa, where caucus voters often recoil at the sight of two-candidate spats.

There is almost daily evidence that the Democratic presidential campaign has moved into a lively new phase in which campaigns are not passing up any opportunities to win over voters.

Mr. Obama's aides are organizing black hair salon owners in South Carolina, a deep-seated social network that advisers said would be critical to pushing a historic black turnout that Mr. Obama hopes can deliver him victory there. In Iowa, the Obama campaign is signing up high school students who will be old enough to vote in the general election and can participate in caucuses.

Mrs. Clinton, after winning a burst of attention by rolling out a detailed health care plan this week, is planning similar speeches in the weeks ahead on education and energy. Mr. Edwards, who campaigned in all 99 Iowa counties in 2004, hit his 76th county on Friday as he made his way across the state to see if the people who supported him in 2004 were still with him.

The three leading contenders have also adopted decidedly different views of how the race will play out. Mrs. Clinton's advisers argued that it would probably end on Feb. 5 when about 20 states vote. Though only 50 percent of the delegates will be selected by that day, the Clinton advisers suggested that one candidate would be so far ahead that there would be huge pressure on the other Democrats to rally around the leader.

Mr. Obama has begun preparing for a much more protracted campaign, arguing that it will be in effect a hunt for delegates that could last well into the spring. To that end, he is competing in some unlikely places - New York, for example, where he is holding a rally in Washington Square Park on Thursday - because under Democratic rules, delegates are allocated to candidates based on the percentage of votes they win. And Mr. Edwards is looking for a victory in Iowa to bounce him to victory in New Hampshire, drawing a shot of attention and contributions that his aides argued would allow him to sweep through the Feb. 5 states.

But if there is one dominant sentiment in the Obama and Edwards camps these days, it is concern that Mrs. Clinton continues to do so well. On Friday, Mr. Obama released a television advertisement in which he talked about the lessons he learned about health care from the death of his mother, the kind of emotional personal anecdote that candidates normally hold back until the end.

Though these three candidates have dominated the race, there are signs that Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico has made inroads. Other candidates - in particular, Senators Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware and Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut - are seen as far less likely to win any primaries. But they could affect the tone of the race based on the issues they press and if they choose to try to take on one of the leading candidates.

Although polls at this point in a campaign are notoriously unpredictable, the fact that Mrs. Clinton is leading in many of them is clearly influencing the way candidates, and the news media, view the race. And Mrs. Clinton is trying to use her standing to overcome a perceived obstacle: that she is tarnished by her White House years and cannot win a general election.

These same polls stirred some concern among Mr. Obama's supporters that he has not yet capitalized on the early excitement that surrounded his campaign. "It would have been nice if he had taken the lead during the summer and increased the lead going into the fall, but in realistic terms, this is as good as it can get," said Tom Miller, the Iowa attorney general, who is a supporter of Mr. Obama. He added, "The key was to get the burst, stabilize it and make a run in the end." Mr. Axelrod said that Mr. Obama's campaign had made a deliberate decision to hold off the bulk of its advertising money until now, when more people are paying attention, and that he was not concerned about polls or perceptions. Mr. Obama spent $1.5 million on television advertisements in Iowa, a substantial amount that Iowa Democrats said has not appeared to improve his standing significantly.

And some of Mr. Obama's advisers said Mrs. Clinton had done a far better job in dealing with one of her biggest tasks - trying to present herself as a candidate of change, notwithstanding her 15 years in Washington - than Mr. Obama had with the experience question. In the final week of August, Mr. Obama expressed frustration to some of his close associates at the course of his campaign, saying he felt his message was adrift, and personally took to rewriting some of the basic themes.

"I was confused initially on this whole experience argument," he told supporters here recently, "because I've been in public service for 20 years as a community organizer, as a civil rights attorney, as a law professor, as a state senator, as a United States senator. And so I was a little puzzled, but I came to realize what they really mean by this argument is that I haven't gotten enough seasoning in Washington." Reflecting his successful fund-raising, Mr. Obama has spent millions to build a field operation in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina, and has enough money to build organizations in other states. "We wouldn't be putting staff in Colorado and California if we weren't comfortable with our financial picture," said David Plouffe, the Obama campaign manager. In Iowa alone, the Obama campaign is preparing to open its 31st field office, which is more than Mr. Edwards or Mrs. Clinton have.

"They are doing the fundamental organizational building that Dean overlooked," said John Norris, an Obama supporter in Iowa, who managed John Kerry's winning caucus campaign over Howard Dean four years ago. But the Democrats have all shied away from sustained attacks on one another. Mr. Axelrod, who was a senior adviser to Mr. Edwards in 2004, said he had learned the pitfalls of attacks in a field of multiple candidates.

"This history of these things is you can't treat the process, to borrow Obama's phrase, like a game of bumper cars," he said. "You bump someone, you never know who else might drive past you."

By Adam Nagourney and Jeff Zeleny, The New York Times, September 22, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton would carry California in the 2008 United States presidential election, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. At least 50 per cent of respondents in the Golden State would vote for 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, an 11-point advantage over actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson, and a 22-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 : Polls & Research, September 22, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Mitt Romney remains the most popular United States presidential contender for Republican Party backers in the Granite State, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. 25 per cent of likely GOP voters in New Hampshire would support the former Massachusetts governor in next year's primary.

Former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani is second with 22 per cent, followed by actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson with 19 per cent, Arizona senator John McCain with 12 per cent, and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee with four per cent.

In the sample of Democratic Party supporters, New York senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is first with 40 per cent, followed by Illinois senator Barack Obama with 17 per cent, former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 14 per cent, New Mexico governor Bill Richardson with 11 per cent, and Delaware senator Joe Biden with five per cent.

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, September 22, 2007

Eventually, they say, the campaign must move in on the leaders

Static numbers in Iowa opinion polls this summer pose a challenge for Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, who will work to build momentum today as he touts his middle-class tax-cut plan in southern Iowa.

Obama's campaign staff denies the campaign has lost its steam, pointing to the roughly 3,000 people they estimate marched for the Illinois senator on Sunday at Sen. Tom Harkin's steak fry in Indianola.

But some political observers say other indicators suggest otherwise. They point to dozens of polls that show Obama's support numbers in Iowa have, for the most part, remained in the upper teens or lower 20s since his February announcement that he is seeking the White House. "It's a good news/bad news story," said Cary Covington, a political science professor at the University of Iowa. "The bad news is he hasn't really taken off, but the good news is he hasn't crashed and burned, either."

Dennis Goldford, a political science professor at Drake University, said: "Any time you're not leading, you need some sort of way of finding a bump. To the extent that things become dormant, that obviously advantages the front-runner. So if you're not the front-runner, you need to find a way of shaking up the field again."

Obama's early campaign stops were, in some ways, like major concerts, drawing thousands of spectators who lavished praise and support on the Illinois senator. But that enthusiasm has not translated into significantly higher poll numbers. Obama's campaign aides say they expect his numbers to climb when Iowans start paying more attention to the campaign this autumn. But Obama has missed out on some of that potential attention, choosing to bypass a nationally televised forum Thursday in Davenport and also planning to skip a big Johnson County Democratic Party barbecue on Oct. 6 that his five best-known competitors have said they will attend.

With less than four months remaining before Iowa's first-in-the-nation caucuses, Obama needs to find a way to move his poll numbers, political observers say. Attempts to break apart from his nearest competitors - including a national bickering match with Hillary Clinton, a major health care plan and an anti-Iraq-war strategy - have not yet done the trick.

Obama supporter Frank Best is not worried. Best, within the past month, stepped down as the Louisa County coordinator for former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards' presidential campaign because he said he felt Obama's campaign had more energy and is the better choice. "Going through as many caucuses as I have ... that is just a norm," Best, 38, said of Obama's static position in the polls. Best noted that Edwards was trailing badly in the polls just months before his second-place finish in the 2004 Iowa Democratic caucuses. "Iowans really, in the later months, will start making up their minds, and that's when you will start seeing the big jumps happen," he said.

Obama has made attempts at setting himself apart within the past two months on a number of topics. In late July, for example, he and Clinton, the national Democratic presidential front-runner, took jabs at each other about how and when meetings with leaders of hostile nations should take place. He called her policies "Bush-Cheney lite" while she accused him of being naive. Those comments were significant because they shoot to the heart of some of the main criticisms of both candidates: He's accused of being inexperienced while she faces accusations of being a Washington insider. Obama also has continued to emphasize his decision to not accept campaign contributions from federal lobbyists or political action committees, and he often contrasts that position against Clinton's - she does accept such contributions.

But those messages have not translated into major gains in the polls.

"He can't just be negative. He can't say Hillary Clinton is a bad candidate because that's not going to sell well, and it's just going to make him look bad," said Covington, the U of I professor. "He does have to start talking about - and you're seeing this happening - 'What are my advantages over her?' " But the points of contrast have to become more focused, Covington said. "He has to make them starker," Covington said. "He has to get voters to care about Clinton's ties to the establishment, that she can't bring about the change that he wants to bring about."

Tommy Vietor, Obama's Iowa press secretary, said the campaign is, if anything, gaining steam as hundreds of new campaign volunteers sign on. The campaign is targeting young voters - even high school students who are of voting age. Obama aides hope that brings about a surge of support because those voters are often ignored by other candidates. Although the majority of polls show Obama in third place, Vietor noted that an ABC News/Washington Post poll in August showed Obama 1 percentage point ahead of Clinton and former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, who were tied with 26 percent. That swing in polls reflects the difficulty in accurately assessing likely caucus support. That is the reason the campaign doesn't place a lot of stock in poll results, Vietor said. "The honest answer is you never want to peak too early in these things," Vietor said. "The best-case scenario is to catch fire at the end, and that has always been our hope and our plan. These polls have gone up and down. ... I think largely they're not relevant, until folks are paying attention."

Many Democratic polls, generally, show a relatively close race between Clinton, Edwards and Obama.

RealClearPolitics.com, a Web site that tracks opinion polls, shows that Clinton has maintained or slightly gained in strength while Edwards' support has softened. Obama's support has remained relatively consistent.

But some observers say the polls offer little more than casual insight into the election progress. In 2004, for example, John Kerry won the Iowa caucuses after trailing in polls for months. Part of the reason is that it's incredibly hard to pinpoint caucusgoers to accurately reflect the outcome. Other factors, such as weather, dramatically play into how many people show up to caucus. "We don't really give a lot of weight to the polls in Iowa," said Carrie Giddins, communications director for the Iowa Democratic Party. "There's so many factors that go into people taking those two hours out of their night in a cold January. Asking them now who they're going to caucus for is very up in the air."

Kedron Bardwell, a professor of political science at Simpson College in Indianola, said he anticipates that campaign ads among Democrats will become more pointed in the coming months.

For Obama and Edwards, it may be a question about opportunity, too. Clinton has, so far, run a relatively mistake-free campaign, but a mess-up could open the door for advancement, he said.

"You need events to move polls," Bardwell said. "You need something happening, and until you get candidates levying more attack adds on each other and getting more serious about challenging each other, I think you'll just continue to see polls just sit where they are."



By Jason Clayworth, Des Moines Register, September 22, 2007

This wasn't supposed to be a cakewalk.

But as the fall campaign begins, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is showing signs that she's on top of the Democratic field to stay.

Up 2-to-1 in many national polls, Clinton leads convincingly in the early primary states of New Hampshire and South Carolina. In first-in-the-nation Iowa, still viewed as a three-way contest between Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards, the New York senator led by five points in the two latest polls, supplanting Edwards, who led last winter and spring.

"If they can't beat her in Iowa, it's going to be amazingly difficult to catch her," said University of Iowa political scientist Bruce Gronbeck.

Nine months ago, things looked strikingly different. Back then, Obama was hot property, smiling confidently on magazine covers, raising money like a seasoned pro and nearly matching Clinton in early-voter surveys. Clinton was anything but new and flashy. Her vote to go to war with Iraq frustrated liberals, while others were wary of "Hillary fatigue" - the prospect of a second Clinton administration draining enthusiasm.

Instead, President Bush's struggles appear to have produced a certain longing for Bill Clinton's presidency that has rubbed off on his wife. Even Obama sees the trend. "Senator Clinton is the default candidate for a lot of Democrats," Obama told NBC's Brian Williams on Monday. "People have fond memories of Bill Clinton."

Since February, the polls have flatlined. They show Clinton ensconced in first and Obama distinctly in second, followed by Edwards in a distant third. The lines never intersect, nor do they show much gyration.

"He seems to have plateaued," Drake University political scientist Dennis Goldford said of Obama. The issue for Obama is experience, or more precisely the lack of it, said veteran Democratic operative Terry Stewart, chairman of the Dubuque County Democratic Party in Iowa, who is neutral in the race.

"The people who have followed Hillary for 15 years since she became first lady realize she has accumulated a wealth of experience, depth and breadth," Stewart said. "That's the biggest thing." Obama is charismatic, he said. But he remains "the new kid on the block" amid world turmoil.

Obama has stunned Democratic insiders with his powerhouse fundraising in which he's matched, or even exceeded, Clinton's efforts. "Our campaign's been clear from the beginning that because we're running against a quasi-incumbent, we don't expect Senator Obama to ever pass Senator Clinton in the national polls before Iowa," said Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt. His man, he insisted, has the experience "to bring fundamental change to Washington." The Illinois senator also has the organization in Iowa, with 31 field offices across the state, he said. "We're right where we need to be in preparation for the primaries and caucuses," LaBolt said.

From the start, candidates such as Obama and Edwards offered alternatives to a front-runner often viewed as cool and aloof and battle-scarred by a litany of intense Washington struggles that included her failed national health care plan in the 1990s. Obama has emphasized his credentials as a change agent.

But a September CNN poll of potential Democratic primary voters found that Clinton - not Obama - was the candidate most likely to bring change. She led Obama on that front 42 to 30 percent, with 10 percent for Edwards.

The warmest candidate? Clinton won that contest, too. A recent Gallup Poll found Clinton to be the "most liked" candidate among Democrats. Her "warmth" rating was 82 percent to Obama's 72 percent and Edwards' 68 percent.

Asked which of the candidates has the right experience, Clinton got 60 percent to 15 percent for Edwards and just 9 percent for Obama.

Obama dismissed that concern with Williams. Voters, he said, "are less familiar with me. They remember me from a (convention) speech in 2004. They have favorable views of me, but I don't think they have a clear sense of what my agenda is. That takes more time."

Obama's foreign-policy missteps have hurt him, such as calling the use of nuclear weapons against terror targets in Afghanistan and Pakistan a "profound mistake." The answer ran counter to longstanding U.S. policy to never rule out nukes, if only for bargaining purposes.

It also gave Clinton a chance to lecture her rival. "Presidents," she said, "should be very careful at all times in discussing the use or non-use of nuclear weapons."

Obama is still known for his soaring rhetoric, which was on full display during a Kansas City stop in May. But some don't see specific policies. "People love the music," Goldford said, "but they keep wondering where the lyrics are."

Edwards, the candidate GOP operative Karl Rove feared the most in 2004 - he now warns of Clinton - can't get untracked. Stories about his $400 haircut undermined momentum. The announcement of his health care ideas drew scant notice compared with the huge play Clinton's plan just received. Said Edwards at an AARP forum in Iowa on Thursday: "I'm very proud of the fact that six, seven months later, Senator Clinton came out with a plan that is very similar to mine." "Well, been there, done that," Clinton responded.

Other Democratic candidates, including Senate veterans Joe Biden and Christopher Dodd, remain frustrated over the lack of attention. "I love Hillary Clinton,' Biden said at the forum. "I've been getting beat up because I'm always saying nice things about her. They think I want to be her secretary of state." But he asked: "What's changed to make you think Hillary's going to be able to pull together 15 percent of Republicans (to win the general election)?"

The hope for Obama and the rest of the pack lies in recent history. In 2004, Howard Dean led the Democratic primary field until just days before Iowa's caucuses. He would up losing big. Polls showed four in 10 Iowa caucus voters in 2004 made their choices in the last week.

Third-quarter fundraising reports due soon could give Obama a bounce if he reels in another prodigious total. "He's done a great job of raising money," said Woody Overton, a Kansas City backer of Obama. "I just hope that that money translates to votes."

By Steve Kraske, Kansas City Star, September 22, 2007

The presidential candidacy of Hillary Clinton has unleashed something new upon the political landscape: the wives.

More than any previous presidential campaign, the candidates' wives - especially on the Democratic side - are stepping forward, speaking out and strutting their own stuff. Outspokenness is suddenly a virtue.

Hillary is, in fact, running not only against front-runners Barack Obama and John Edwards, but against their equally powerful and ambitious wives. Ironically, the trend of first lady as co-contender began with Hillary when husband Bill introduced a twofer presidency. Elect me and you get my smart wife, too, he told voters. That worked out well.

Thanks to the debacle of Hillary's attempted health care plan, the likelihood of her ever becoming the first woman president seemed nil to impossible. In yet another irony, it was her husband's betrayal that saved Hillary from obscurity.

Public sympathy - as well as Hillary's dignified public response to humiliation - trumped her lousy record as a policymaker and, voila, she was the junior senator from New York. Now she's nearly the presumptive Democratic nominee for president.

The shift in perception of Hillary as aggressive presidential wife to self-deprecating presidential candidate has caused a shift in the estrogen ecosphere. With a woman leading the race, the other females have ramped up their own roles and rhetoric.

Republican wives are less out-front than their Democratic contemporaries, in part because Republicans tend toward more traditional roles, but also because those who have been outspoken have been slapped down. The once-talkative and confident Judith Giuliani has begun confining her commentary lately to golf, following a few hard knocks in the media ring. Other front-runner wives - Ann Romney, Cindy McCain and Jeri Thompson - tend to participate more quietly or behind the scenes.

Because of Hillary, however, the Democrats are another story. Michelle Obama and Elizabeth Edwards both have taken their places front and center as they challenge the other candidates and defend their own husbands. Like Hillary, they're both lawyers who are unaccustomed to letting the men do all the talking.

When Ann Coulter attacked John Edwards, for instance, Elizabeth Edwards called the columnist live on Hardball and "politely" asked her to stop. And in a deft move that both objectified and minimized her husband's opponents, Mrs. Edwards said: "We can't make John black. We can't make him a woman. Those things get you a lot of press, worth a certain amount of fundraising dollars." Mrs. Edwards has become bad cop to her husband's good cop, in other words. She carries the family aggression for him so that he can remain the laid-back, deeply caring guy. While he opposes same-sex marriage, she stars at the kickoff event at San Francisco's Gay Pride Parade and declares her full support.

What Elizabeth Edwards is doing for her husband, we all do to some degree in our marriages. And though we're all entitled to our own opinions, those opinions have consequences in politics. First wives - or first husbands, as the case may be - don't get to serve as first mates during pillow talk and then pretend their voices are irrelevant as policies take shape.

Michelle Obama has taken a slightly different tack. She carries the family values, making sure voters know she's at home each night to tuck in the couple's two girls. As opposed to Elizabeth Edwards, perhaps, whose young children are on the road with their parents? While Barack Obama stays above the fray, drawing adoring crowds and focusing on issues, his wife fleshes out his human dimension. He's not the "next messiah, who's going to fix it all," she told USA Today. Sensibly noting that a man deified is a man people will try to take down, Michelle might have skipped telling Glamour magazine that Obama is "snore-y and stinky" in the mornings. There's a significant amount of wiggle room between deification and halitosis.

Whether voters want their first ladies to be full presidential partners rather than silent sidekicks remains to be seen. Meanwhile, Hillary is learning that becoming the first woman president of the United States requires not only defeating the men.

She has to beat their wives, too.

By Kathleen Parker, Houston Chronicle, September 22, 2007

There wasn't a big winner of Thursday night's debate among the Democratic presidential candidates, but there was a clear loser - Barack Obama.

The Illinois senator skipped the 90-minute event in Davenport. That left the stage to his five leading rivals - John Edwards, Bill Richardson, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd and Joe Biden. We've seen front-runners blow off debates when they didn't want to risk becoming a target for their opponents, or elevate the stature of those foes, or risk mistakes.

But most polls show Obama is in a close race with Clinton and Edwards in Iowa. On top of that, this wasn't just an Iowa debate. It was a prime-time event broadcast around the country by public television stations. And it was sponsored by AARP, the largest advocacy group for senior citizens. Since the average age of a caucusgoer in Iowa is something over 50, it wasn't as if Obama was stiffing some obscure party constituency group.

The debate was also important because for most of the event the topics were confined to questions of retirement security and health care. Those issues are increasingly important to all Americans, especially now that the economy has the jitters.

- Clinton turned in another solid performance. She is doing well in most of these debates because she shows command of the issues and doesn't fall into political traps that could hurt her chances. The political and issue competency she displays is helping her tamp down negative feelings Democratic voters have about her.

- Edwards showed again he has clearly thought through the big issues facing the country.

- Richardson got a lot of air time, but he wasted some of it by talking about what he'd done in New Mexico. As Biden noted, New Mexico is a small state, and running it may be different from running the country.

- Biden, who is at 1 percent in the polls, came ready to take shots at his opponents. They basically ignored him when he did that. He was at his best when he was talking about ending the war in Iraq.

- Dodd, who is chairman of the Senate banking committee, had one of his best debate performances because he finally got a good chance to show his competency on the financial issues concerning Americans.

As with all these Democratic debates, there was too much time wasted bashing President Bush. He's not running again, and people are more interested in hearing solutions than sniping.

However, such bashing is useful whenever a Democratic candidate runs out of solutions to offer and needs to fill air time. At one point Thursday night, Richardson seemed to acknowledge that's what he was doing.




By David Yepsen, Des Moines Register, September 21, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Hillary Rodham Clinton remains the top candidate in the race for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination in the United States, according to a poll by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. 42 per cent of respondents would support the New York senator in a 2008 primary.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 25 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 14 per cent. Support is lower for New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich, Delaware senator Joe Biden, and Connecticut senator Chris Dodd.

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

INDIANOLA, Iowa -- Democrats enter the fall campaign with one question hanging over their party: Can anyone catch Hillary Rodham Clinton?

The New York senator has combined the party's most popular brand name with a muscular, disciplined campaign to take a commanding position almost everywhere. She's opened double-digit leads over her nearest rivals in national polls, as well as in early voting states such as New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida and California. If she runs the tables there, the nomination almost certainly will be hers.

If ...

Yet in Iowa, the state that will kick off the voting in precinct caucuses one night in January, she's still in a three-person race with former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina and Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois.

And history suggests that anything can happen there in the final weeks as more voters tune in. At this stage four years ago, Howard Dean led in the Iowa polls, only to collapse as voting neared, and John Kerry trailed in a distant third place, only to go on to win Iowa and the nomination.

"This thing is just starting," said Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware. "It's like the gun just went off." While Biden and his rivals clash over who has the better plan to get out of Iraq or who'd do more on health care, Iowa voters tend to see the top candidates as similar on the hot-button issues.

Rather than making their voting decisions on issues, then, voters are signaling in interviews that they're more interested in whether a candidate could win the general election and how he or she would govern -- an approach that could decide whom they support in coming weeks.

Most Iowa Democrats interviewed in recent days like or admire Clinton. Many think her experience in Washington as a first lady and senator would give her an edge in pushing the Democratic agenda through Congress and into law.

"She has the experience and knows what it takes to get things done. She is the best chance we have to get universal health care," said Cindy Forbes of Urbandale, a suburb of Des Moines. Reminded that Clinton failed to enact health care as first lady, Forbes said that was a plus, not a minus, because it gave her valuable experience in the Washington power game.

But some Iowa Democrats harbor doubts about whether Clinton's political baggage -- rekindled by the recent brouhaha over a major contributor -- would cost them the general election. "I'm scared of Hillary. I'm scared she'll bring out all the critics again, all the talk about all the scandal and all that," said Bob McNertney of Sioux City. "But I do think she'll win the nomination. She looks unstoppable."

Many are also drawn to Obama and his lofty appeal to more civil politics. "I love listening to him speak," said Sandra Johnson, a factory worker from Thompson, a small town near the Minnesota border. "This is the third time I've heard him. He makes you feel like things really could change." Though Obama's been in the Senate for only three years, Johnson thinks that gives him a fresh, less jaded approach.

But a lot of people think he's too inexperienced to be president.

"It's not his time," said Cindy Forbes of Urbandale. "He's not experienced enough. He'll be president someday, but not now."

And many prefer Edwards and his give-'em-hell populism. They're eager to fight the Republicans and big business at every opportunity, especially as they watch the Democratic Congress fail to stand up to President Bush and end the war.

Finally, all tend to like Biden and rest of the field -- Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut and Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio. But few Iowa Democrats think any of them can win the nomination.

By Steven Thomma, The Sacramento Bee, September 21, 2007

Democrat presidential hopeful favored by 33% of voters, holds 13% edge over rival Obama.

New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton continues to hold a double-digit lead over her Democratic presidential rivals among Michigan voters, a new poll shows.

Clinton got 33 percent support, compared with 20 percent for Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and 17 percent for former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, according to the statewide survey, conducted Sept. 14-19 by Mitchell Interactive, a polling firm with offices in East Lansing and Washington, D.C.

About 1 in 5 Michigan Democrats remains undecided in the contest. The poll found 3 percent support each for Delaware Sen. Joe Biden and U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio. Three percent of the vote was splintered among the remaining hopefuls.

"I was somewhat surprised that John Edwards, who has strong support among union leaders, is still trailing among rank-and-file union members," said pollster Steve Mitchell.

Among card-carrying unionists, Clinton was favored by 28 percent, while Obama netted 23 percent and Edwards 22 percent. Among nonunion members, Clinton also came out on top with 35 percent backing, compared with Obama's 19 percent and Edward's 15 percent.

The poll of 441 likely Democratic voters, with a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percentage points, also found:

Clinton led among white voters with 34 percent support, trailed by Edwards at 20 percent and Obama at 15 percent. Among African-Americans, Obama led with 53 percent followed by Clinton at 28 percent. Edwards received no support among blacks.

Michigan voters are scheduled to vote in a Jan. 15 presidential primary.

The Democratic candidates are not allowed to campaign in Michigan before then because of national Democratic Party rules that are giving the early presidential stage to voters in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada.

Clinton, for instance, was at a fundraiser Sunday in Southfield but made no public comments.

However, the Democratic candidates were granted an exception to appear at the Arab American Institute's national conference Oct. 26-28 in Dearborn. That might be the only public appearance the Democratic candidates make in Michigan before the primary.

By Charlie Cain and Gordon Trowbridge, The Detroit News, September 21, 2007

SACRAMENTO, Calif. - New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is leading among Democrats in the California presidential primary, while Rudy Giuliani is slightly ahead of his three major Republican rivals, according to a new poll from the Public Policy Institute of California.

Clinton has the support of 41 percent of likely Democratic primary voters, according to the survey, which was taken over a seven-day period following the Labor Day weekend and released Thursday. Her closest rival is Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, who has 23 percent. Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards is at 14 percent.

The poll shows Republican voters to be more divided. Giuliani, the former mayor of New York City, is slightly ahead of the GOP pack, with 22 percent of likely primary voters saying they will support him. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is at 16 percent, as is former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson, who only recently joined the race. Arizona Sen. John McCain is at 15 percent. The margin of error is plus or minus 5 percentage points.

Democrats allow independents to vote in their primary, although Republicans do not. The survey results reflect the views of 455 registered Democrats and independents likely to cast ballots in the Democratic primary and 353 registered Republicans likely to vote in their party's primary. Both contests will be held Feb. 5. PPIC is a nonpartisan think tank based in San Francisco. The poll results were based on a telephone survey of 2,003 California adult residents who were interviewed from Sept. 4 to Sept. 11.

Associated Press, September 21, 2007

After officially declaring his candidacy, U.S. Senator Fred Thompson moves ahead of former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani in the race for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination. One-third (32%) of those who say they will vote in a Republican primary or caucus will vote for Thompson while 28 percent will vote for Giuliani. Much further back is John McCain, who continues his downward slide with 11 percent saying they would vote for the Arizona Senator, and 9 percent who say they would vote for former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney.

On the Democratic side, Senator Hillary Clinton continues to build on her large lead. Just under half (46%) of those who would vote in a Democratic primary or caucus would vote for the former First Lady while one-quarter (25%) would vote for Illinois Senator Barack Obama. Former vice president candidate and North Carolina Senator John Edwards is further back with 14 percent saying they would vote for him. No other candidate is in double digits.

These are some of the results of a Harris Poll of 2,372 U.S. adults surveyed online by Harris Interactive(R) between September 6 and 14, 2007. This survey included 769 adults who expect to vote in a Democratic primary or caucus and 504 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.

Votes by Generation

One interesting difference is the support of the different generations. On the Democratic side, Senator Obama does better than Senator Clinton among Echo Boomers (those aged 18 to 29). While 42 percent of this youngest generation will vote for him, 37 percent will vote for her. However, in the age group that is most likely to actually vote, Matures (those 61 and older), Senator Clinton leads Senator Obama by a very wide margin (56% versus 16%). In fact, one in five Matures (21%) will vote for John Edwards, so he is ahead of Senator Obama as well in this key age group.

On the Republican side a similar difference occurs. One-third (33%) of both Echo Boomers and Generation Xers (30 to 41) will vote for Rudy Giuliani while Fred Thompson garners just 8 percent and 22 percent of these generations respectively. But, again among those generations more likely to vote, Fred Thompson is ahead. It is close among Baby Boomers (those aged 42 to 60) as one-third (33%) of this generation will vote for Giuliani and 37 percent will vote for Thompson. Among Matures, the lead is greater - 44 percent will vote for Thompson and 16 percent will vote for Giuliani. Interestingly, one in five (20%) of the youngest generation, Echo Boomers, say they will vote for the oldest candidate, John McCain.

Consideration

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. On the Democratic side, three-quarters of Democrats (76%) would consider Hillary Clinton while over half (58%) would consider Barack Obama and just under half (48%) would consider Al Gore. Among Independents, it's a tie as 35 percent would consider Hillary Clinton and 34 percent would consider Barack Obama.

On the Republican side, just over half (52%) of Republicans would consider Rudy Giuliani and just under half (46%) would consider Fred Thompson. The next two Republicans are not even candidates as 39 percent of Republicans would consider former Secretary of State Colin Powell and 34 percent would consider current Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Among Independents, 28 percent would each consider Rudy Giuliani and Colin Powell while one-quarter (23%) would consider John McCain and 20 percent Fred Thompson. Overall, more would consider a Democratic candidate over a Republican candidate but the gap has narrowed. In May, 71 percent would consider one of the Democratic candidates while 58 percent would consider one of the Republicans - a gap of 13 percent. Over the summer this has narrowed and today the gap is just six points - 66 percent would consider a Democratic leader and 60 percent would consider a Republican leader.

So What?

Now that Fred Thompson has ended his "flirtation" with the presidential race, it will be interesting to watch as he participates in debates and is actually campaigning. Does his rise to the top hold or was it pure star power? Time will tell.

On the Democratic side, it appears that the race really is Hillary Clinton's to lose at this point as her ever expanding lead is now at 21 percent. The two running in second place for each party's nomination currently are tops with the youngest of voters. Barack Obama feels like one of them - his youth and vitality are something they can latch onto and relate to. Rudy Giuliani is one the main figures from the one major national event that has shaped their lives so far - September 11th. They feel drawn to him because of that. But, as both camps are aware, these youngest voters actually vote in the lowest of numbers. Can either campaign translate their popularity into turnout come primary or caucus day?

The Atlanta Journal Constitution, September 20, 2007

The party conventions have become pro-forma, made-for-TV anointments of the presidential nominees.

But some political pundits are suggesting that this time could be different, at least on the Republican side, and that the GOP gathering in Minneapolis-St. Paul next September might actually pick the nominee.

John B. Judis makes the case for a brokered convention in the current issue of The New Republic. He points to the fact that the four leading Republican contenders are rather tightly bunched in the polls, argues that the accelerated primary schedule makes it easier for candidates to stay in the race, and after crunching the poll numbers in the early voting states says it's unlikely that one or two candidates will break out.

Rudy Giuliani is leading in the national polls, but is followed closely by Fred Thompson. John McCain appears to be resurging. And Mitt Romney, while fourth in most national surveys, is leading in Iowa and New Hampshire.

On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton is well ahead in the polls and could wrap up the nomination well before the Democratic convention next August in Denver.

So Judis says that if Republicans can't settle on their nominee until the convention, that could help Democrats, who would have a head start in coalescing around their standard-bearer.

"It's the Republicans, not the Democrats, who are looking at a political nightmare in 2008," he writes.

By Foon Rhee, The Boston Globe, September 20, 2007

PELLA, Iowa (AP) - Just off the quaint town square, a pizza shop owner and an employee took a break to banter about politics one recent late-summer day. They did not always agree, but like many others, found common ground on their preference for president - no one yet.

"I am turned off," Chad Ver Steeg, a 42-year-old Republican who runs the Pizza Ranch restaurant. He lamented the mudslinging by both parties and said, "I don't look forward to this election." Added fellow conservative Joel Ruisch, 36: "I haven't followed it enough to even come close to picking who to support."

For all the time and money that the candidates have invested, a large number of voters in each party remains uncommitted or willing to change their minds four months before voting begins.

More Republicans fall into that category than Democrats.

The difference reflects the wide-open GOP race. There are several strong contenders - Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney and John McCain - but none has emerged as the consensus of a dispirited Republican establishment.

Conversely, the Democratic field is more settled. Hillary Rodham Clinton has a sizable lead over her most formidable challengers, Barack Obama and John Edwards. Democratic voters have indicated they are relatively comfortable with their choices. Thus, more have picked someone to back.

"It's all still very fluid. Relatively few people have focused a lot on this. People aren't fully committed yet," said Andrew Kohut, a nonpartisan pollster and director of the Pew Research Center. "Generally most people are going to make up their mind in the month of the primary, and some people make up their mind in the last final days."

Nationally, an Associated Press-Ipsos poll from last week showed a sizable chunk of Republicans, 22 percent, do not support the top candidates or fall into the undecided category. Among Democrats, 12 percent have not locked in on a person to back.

Clinton is the Democratic leader in the poll, but none of the Republicans has emerged as a clear front-runner, especially among key voting groups like evangelicals, conservatives and men.

State-specific surveys for the Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg last week showed double-digit percentages of undecided Republicans and Democrats alike in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. Those states are among the first to hold contests in the march to the nomination. In addition, about half or more of the Republican and Democratic voters in each state signaled that they still might vote for someone else.

All that is good news for underdogs looking for opportunities to break out of the pack.

Democrat John Kerry learned the power of winning over undecided voters in 2004. All but dead just a few weeks before the Iowa caucuses, Kerry courted late-deciders and came from behind to best early favorites Howard Dean and Dick Gephardt. The victory gave Kerry the momentum to become the Democratic nominee.

Four years later, the 2008 race began extraordinarily early but voter attention remained low. Last December, as the first candidates entered the race and others prepared to follow suit, just 27 percent of people told Pew they had given a lot of thought to the candidates. By July, after more than six months of wall-to-wall campaigning, that figure had only inched up to 34 percent. "The public is grazing on what they're hearing from these campaigns, not really taking it in and processing it," Kohut said.

Gallup surveys from the most recent presidential elections show it's typical for more than one in 10 people to be undecided each September before a primary season.

Direct comparisons are difficult, however, given that the 2008 race is the first since 1928 in which neither a sitting president nor a vice president is running for the highest office. This time, there are no incumbents or obvious heirs apparent pursuing the nominations, making for the most volatile races in decades.

-In 2004, Bush was the Republican incumbent. Kerry, the eventual Democratic nominee, faced several foes, including Dean, Gephardt, Edwards and Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman. Four months before voting began that year, 16 percent of Democrats were undecided.

-In 2000, contested races occurred for both the Democratic and Republican nominations. Vice President Al Gore battled Sen. Bill Bradley of New Jersey for the Democrats' nod. Just after Labor Day, 18 percent of Democrats identified themselves as uncommitted to either man. On the Republican side, the crowded field included establishment favorite Texas Gov. George W. Bush and insurgent McCain. Among the GOP, 17 percent of voters said they weren't yet backing a candidate.

-In 1996, Bill Clinton was the Democratic incumbent. Among Republicans, Sen. Bob Dole of Kansas ultimately emerged as the nominee after beating back several GOP rivals in a heated race. The September before, roughly 13 percent of Republicans said they were undecided.

Recent interviews in Iowa showed the scope of 2008 indecision.

Some voters said they haven't tuned in yet while others insisted they are put off by the entire process starting so early. A few who have shopped around complained that they don't like their options, and, thus, will not support anyone until the end. "I just haven't been paying much attention," said Delbert Zwart, 60, of Hawarden, who showed up at the Pizza Ranch on a recent rainy weekday morning to meet Republican Mike Huckabee. Across the restaurant, John Grandia, 66, of Pella, gave his status: "I'm searching. I haven't found someone who fits the whole mold - from his lifestyle to what he believes in - of strong conservative positions."

Discontent appeared among Democrats as well but to a lesser extent.

"I'm not in love with any of the Democrats," said Philip Stanfield, 58, of Cherokee, a former Republican who has voted Democrat since 1992 and plans to participate in the Democratic caucuses. "I would have liked to have seen Al Gore get in again, but I don't think he's going to do it."

Just after Labor Day, Jody Halsted, 36, of Akeny, toted her two daughters - 1-year-old Caelan and 2 1/2-year-old Brenna - to see Thompson's first event as a full-fledged candidate. She had seen all the other Republican candidates in person but remained uncommitted, saying she was looking for a conservative who could win in November. After listening to Thompson, she said, "he's probably my top candidate" and then added: "right now" as she, like so many others, reserved the right to change her mind.

By Liz Sidoti, Associated Press, September 20, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton remains the most popular presidential contender in the United States, according to a poll by Hart/Newhouse released by the Wall Street Journal and NBC News. At least 49 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in head-to-head contests against four prospective Republican rivals.

Hillary Clinton holds a seven-point lead over former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, a nine-point advantage over actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson, a 13-point lead over former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, and a 14-point advantage over former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee.

In other match-ups, Illinois senator Barack Obama leads Thompson by nine points, and Romney by 17 points.

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

In handicapping her chances for the nomination, there is perhaps no stronger argument in Sen. Hillary Clinton's (D-N.Y.) favor than the fact that most Democrats believe she represents their best chance of getting the White House back in 2008.

With their party out of power in the Oval Office for the past seven years, the priority for many Democrats appears to be winning -- no matter what that entails or who they have to nominate to make it happen.

The newest NBC/WSJ poll provides some intriguing numbers that suggest that the power of Clinton's electability has grown in recent months and may well provide a key to understanding her continued lead in national surveys.

Let's Parse the Polls!

We start with the horse race numbers in the NBC/WSJ poll. Clinton led with 44 percent followed by Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) at 23 percent, and former Sen. John Edwards (N.C.) at 16 percent. No other candidate received more than four percent of the vote. That poll, in the field from Sept. 7-10, mirrored the results of the previous NBC/WSJ poll in July that had Clinton at 43 percent, Obama at 22 percent and Edwards at 13 percent.

But, the NBC/WSJ survey conducted in April showed a far different race, with Clinton narrowly leading Obama, 36 percent to 31 percent, while Edwards took 20 percent.

A look further inside the numbers suggest electability may have something to do with that change.

When Democrats (or those who said they would vote in a Democratic primary) were asked in April "Which candidate has the best chance to defeat the Republican candidate and win back the White House," 39 percent said Clinton while 32 percent said Obama and 22 percent named Edwards.

Five months later, 54 percent said Clinton was the Democrat best able to beat a Republican in the general election, a gain of 15 points over that time. Obama, meanwhile, dropped 14 points down to 18 percent while Edwards fell seven points to 15 percent.

Those numbers jibe with two surveys conducted by the Washington Post over the summer -- one a national poll, the other of Iowa Democrats.

In the national survey, 54 percent of Democrats said Clinton had "the best chance to defeat the Republican nominee in the general election" while 22 percent named Obama and just nine percent opted for Gore.

The Iowa poll was slightly less lopsided, although Clinton -- with 36 percent -- was the clear choice as the strongest potential nominee for Democrats. Obama (22 percent) and Edwards (20 percent) were roughly tied for second as the most electable.

What's changed? It's hard to pinpoint any one factor as responsible for the increased perception that Clinton is the strongest Democratic general election nominee. Our guess would be that the collective weight of her strong and consistent performances in the televised debates to date and the slew of national polls that have shown her as the frontrunner have a lot to do with her changing image in the minds of some Democratic voters.

(One caveat worth noting -- especially if you're Obama or Edwards: In head to head general election matchups, Clinton, Obama and Edwards all tend to run ahead of the three most likely Republican nominees. Under that logic, Democrats hold a structural advantage over Republicans that has little to do with Clinton and a lot to do with the war in Iraq and President Bush's unpopularity.)

It appears to be a piece of good luck for Clinton that even as more Democrats are seeing her as their strongest candidate there is a simultaneous pragmatic strain within the party. In the NBC/WSJ poll, 40 percent of Democrats said it was more important that the nominee has the "best chance of defeating the Republican nominee" while 48 percent said it was more important that the nominee agreed with them on most issues."

Contrast that with the response to the same question posed to Republicans in the NBC/WSJ poll. Just 26 percent of Republicans said it was more important for their nominee to have the best chance of defeating the Democrat while 62 percent said it was more important for the nominee to share their views on issues.

We've written extensively about the head versus heart debate going on in each party. The above data suggests that Democrats may be leaning toward a head vote in 2008 -- interested less in Clinton's vote for the 2002 use-of-force resolution against Iraq than picking the candidate they believe is best positioned to win the White House. If that dynamic holds up through January, it will be tough to beat Clinton.

By Chris Cillizza, The Washington Post, September 19, 2007

(CNN)- Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-New York, says the controversy surrounding the "Jena 6" court case is a "teachable moment for America."

"People need to understand that we cannot let this kind of inequality and injustice happen anywhere in America," the Democratic presidential hopeful told Rev. Al Sharpton when she called into his nationally syndicated radio program Tuesday afternoon.

She was speaking about a case in the town of Jena, Louisiana, where six African-American teenagers were initially charged with attempted murder and conspiracy to commit attempted murder in connection with the Dec. 4 beating of a white student.

Last Friday, the 3rd District Court of Appeals in Lake Charles, Louisiana threw out the conviction for second degree battery against one of the boys, Mychal Bell, saying the charges should have been brought in juvenile court. Charges against Bell were reduced, as were charges against Carwin Jones and Theodore Shaw, who have not yet come to trial. Bryant Purvis and an unidentified juvenile remain charged with attempted murder and conspiracy to commit murder.

The New York senator said she has put a request into the Bush administration to ask the Civil Rights division of the Justice Department to investigate the case because, "we have a responsibility to confront racial injustice and intolerance anywhere." She said she did so because she was troubled by reports that the youths were charged and sentenced in a manner that may have been inconsistent with what was called for.

On Thursday, thousands of people are expected to march on the small central Louisiana town to protest what they feel are excessive criminals charges and bond amounts for the teens.

By Jamie Crawford, CNN, September 19, 2007

WASHINGTON - Thirteen years after presiding over the biggest policy debacle of her husband's presidency, Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton said Tuesday her experience with failure makes her the one who can succeed in providing universal health coverage.

"If you don't learn from your mistakes, you stop growing," Clinton said in an interview with The Associated Press, insisting that voters should trust her leadership on health care and other issues as she seeks a return to the White House in her own right.

The former first lady told the AP that her seven years in the Senate had taught her valuable lessons about the need for negotiation and compromise. "I think I know what to do and what not to do," Clinton said.

Clinton touched on several issues in a 20-minute interview with the AP, but health care was the dominant topic.

The New York Democrat unveiled her health care plan Monday in Iowa, promising to bring coverage to all by building on the current employer-based system and using tax credits to make insurance more affordable. The centerpiece of her plan is a so-called "individual mandate," requiring everyone to have health insurance the way most states require drivers to purchase auto insurance.

Clinton's pragmatism about negotiating on health care and other issues has drawn considerable criticism from rival Democrat John Edwards. The 2004 vice presidential nominee has tried to paint Clinton as a tool of special interests in Washington and has panned her apparent willingness to allow political adversaries to have a role in crafting the health care overhaul.

Clinton rejected that criticism. "I wish it were possible just to wave a magic wand and to say from the White House, 'Here's what I want.' But that's not the way it works," she told the AP. "You either convince the opposition to be part of the solution instead of part of the problem or you defeat them in the political process. That's how it works."

In the interview, Clinton also refused to criticize a newspaper ad run by the liberal group MoveOn.org referring to Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, as "Gen. Betray-Us." The ad has drawn widespread scorn from Republicans, and GOP candidate Rudy Giuliani's campaign put up a Web ad criticizing Clinton for not repudiating MoveOn.

Clinton was asked why her rivals' wives had been taking shots at her when the candidates themselves seemed less comfortable doing so. "I'll leave it to the others to decide how to run their campaigns," she said, laughing.

Barack Obama's wife, Michelle, recently told an interviewer she rejected the notion that "it's Hillary's turn" to be president. And Elizabeth Edwards has suggested the former first lady is too polarizing to be elected and that her husband, John Edwards, would be a more effective champion for women's issues than Clinton would be.

On her health care plan, Clinton said she planned to enforce the mandate to purchase health care through tax credits and other incentives. "At this point, we don't have anything punitive that we have proposed," she said. But she said she could envision a day when "you have to show proof to your employer that you're insured as a part of the job interview - like when your kid goes to school and has to show proof of vaccination."

Such details would be worked out later through negotiations with Congress, she said.

The individual mandate - and how to enforce it - has been a flash point in the debate over how to bring health care to all. Massachusetts enacted a universal health care law this year that included such a mandate to be enforced through fines and tax penalties. But the state has already exempted 20 percent of the population from purchasing insurance because of its cost.

Clinton said she had studied the Massachusetts model but felt the federal government had tools at its disposal that states don't have to help make insurance more affordable. "We're going to have a transition period. This is not going to happen immediately and be implemented immediately," she said.

Republicans have been quick to criticize Clinton's plan, including presidential contender Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who signed the state's health care plan into law.

Clinton said she looked forward to tangling with her rivals over health policy, including Republicans "who understood that we had to reform health care before they started running for president."

On Tuesday, Clinton began airing a 30-second ad statewide in Iowa and New Hampshire promoting her new health care plan. The ad reminds viewers of her failed effort to pass universal health care in the early 1990s, trying to portray a thwarted enterprise as one of vision. "She changed our thinking when she introduced universal health care to America," the ad's announcer says.

Though her ads are airing in major markets in both states, they are appearing with greater frequency in Iowa, where polls show her in a tight contest with Obama and Edwards

Meanwhile, a new national poll indicated a majority of Democrats believe Clinton would do a better job addressing health care should she be elected president than the other major candidates.

Sixty-one percent of likely Democratic primary voters said they are confident in how she would handle the issue, according to a CBS News poll. That compared to 42 percent who expressed that view of Obama and 39 percent who said so about Edwards.

The poll was conducted from Sept. 14 to 16 and involved telephone interviews with 706 adults, including 289 Democratic primary voters. The margin of sampling error for the Democrats was plus or minus six percentage points.

By Beth Fouhy, Associated Press, September 18, 2007

Senator Hillary Clinton continues to hold a huge lead in the New Hampshire Presidential Primary. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey shows Clinton earning 40% of the vote and opening up a 23-point advantage over Senator Barack Obama. Obama attracts support from 17% of Likely Primary Voters in the state while former Senator John Edwards is at 14% in this poll.

New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson moved into double digits for the first time at 11%. He had been at 9% in the previous Rasmussen Reports poll.

Thirty-nine percent (39%) of New Hampshire Primary voters say Clinton is the candidate of change. Twenty-five percent (25%) say that label applies to Obama and 16% see Edwards as the candidate of change. There is a significant gender gap on this point. By a 43% to 23% margin, women see Clinton rather than Obama as the candidate. Men are evenly divided between those candidates

Twenty-four percent (24%) of New Hampshire’s Democratic Primary voters would not want Barack Obama to win the Democratic nomination. Twenty percent (20%) say the same about both Clinton and Edwards. Twenty-nine percent (29%) say any of the those three candidates are acceptable. Once again, a gender gap is visible-28% of men do not want Clinton to win the nomination while only 15% of women hold that view.

Thirty-four percent (34%) of Democratic Primary Voters say that Presidential debates are Very Important in terms of how they will vote in the Primary.

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

This is the third straight Rasmussen Reports poll showing Clinton with a large lead in New Hampshire. Last month, Clinton had a 15-point advantage over Obama. In June, she held a 17-point lead.

The Republican Primary in New Hampshire, like the Republican race generally, is more comptetitive.

Clinton's lead in New Hampshire is similar to her lead in the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll.

Among New Hampshire Primary Voters, Clinton is viewed favorably by 82% of Likely Primary Voters and unfavorably by 16%.

Obama is viewed favorably by 78% and unfavorably by 20%.

Those figures include 36% with a Very Favorable opinion of Clinton and 31% with a Very Favorable opinion of Obama.

Seventy-eight percent (78%) have a favorable opinion of Edwards while 22% say the opposite. Twenty-eight percent (28%) have a Very Favorable opinion of Edwards.

Rasmussen Reports, September 18, 2007

Maryland voters strongly favor the nationwide presidential frontrunners, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and former New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, but about a third of likely primary voters of both parties remain undecided, according to a recent statewide phone survey.

Clinton, meanwhile, is tied with Illinois Sen. Barack Obama among the state's black voters, with each winning support from about a third of those polled. Blacks make up about 28 percent of state residents, forming a potentially powerful voting bloc for Democratic candidates.

With four months until the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary launch the voting season, support for the candidates is fluid, according to pollster Steve Raabe, president of OpinionWorks, the Annapolis firm that conducted the phone survey from Aug. 24-26.

"The preceding states will dramatically impact the way Maryland ultimately votes," Raabe said.
Residents of Maryland, Washington and Virginia will cast ballots in a Feb. 12 primary, a week after the Super Tuesday contests that are expected to produce the eventual nominees. So Maryland's vote is not likely to change the outcome of the contest.

The OpinionWorks poll shows Clinton, supported by Gov. Martin O'Malley, ahead of the Democratic pack, with 32 percent of the vote, compared with Obama's 18 percent, and 10 percent for former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards.

The other Democratic candidates - Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr., New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and Ohio Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich - register in the low single digits. Connecticut Sen. Christopher J. Dodd was not included in the poll. About 32 percent of those surveyed said they were unsure whom they would support.

Giuliani, who is backed by former Maryland Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr., holds a firm lead among Maryland Republicans, with 32 percent supporting his candidacy. Arizona Sen. John McCain is supported by 13 percent of likely primary voters, former Tennessee senator and actor Fred Thompson is the pick of 12 percent, and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney is at 8 percent. Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, Texas Rep. Ron Paul and Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas are in the low single digits. Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo was included in the poll but received less than 1 percent. About 29 percent of Republican primary voters are undecided.

The margin of error was 5.4 percentage points for the Democratic contest and 7.4 percentage points for Republicans. The Sun used OpinionWorks to conduct two city Democratic primary polls this summer, but this statewide survey of 335 Democrats and 177 Republicans was part of a separate poll initiated by a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization. It was conducted before Thompson entered the race.

The most critical aspect of the survey - and the one that could be relevant to the outcome of the Democratic primary if it holds up in other states - is the strength of Clinton's support in the black community, said Donald F. Norris, professor and chairman of the department of public policy at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County.

Clinton and Obama each polled at 31 percent among black voters. Norris said Clinton probably benefits from the support that her husband, former President Bill Clinton, maintains among African-Americans.

Hillary Clinton trumps Obama among white voters, 31 percent to 13 percent. She is ahead in Baltimore City as well, 40 percent to 23 percent, and in Baltimore County, 34 percent to 10 percent. Most notably, perhaps, Clinton leads Obama in vote-rich, heavily African-American Prince George's County, 33 percent to 28 percent.

Obama's strongest performance is with the 35-and- younger age group. He takes 34 percent of the vote to Clinton's 25 percent. Clinton, however, wins the other age brackets. But, Norris cautioned: "Young voters don't turn out to vote in the numbers that older voters do."

On the Republican side, Giuliani leads McCain in each age bracket, among white voters, and with men and women.

By Jennifer Skalka, Baltimore Sun, September 18, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Voters in New Hampshire are evenly split in their assessment of Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton and Republican Rudy Giuliani, according to a poll by SurveyUSA released by WBZ-TV. 47 per cent of respondents in the Granite State would vote for the New York senator in the 2008 United States presidential election, while 47 per cent would support the former New York City mayor.

In other contests, Rodham Clinton leads actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson by 10 points, and trails former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney by one point.

In 2004, Democrat John Kerry won New Hampshire's four electoral votes, with 50 per cent of the vote. The Granite State had backed the eventual president in every U.S. election since 1980.

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, September 17, 2007

Alan Greenspan, a conservative central banker, has tossed a political grenade into the 2008 elections and it exploded right under his Republican Party.

In his memoir, "The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World,'' the former Federal Reserve chairman skewers President George W. Bush and congressional Republicans for what he said was reckless spending and a politically driven economic agenda and said they deserved to lose control of Congress in 2006. By contrast, he praised former President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, and his economic record.

Greenspan's words are likely to echo throughout next year's campaigns for president and Congress.

"Democrats will taunt the Republicans with this and they will have to address it,'' said James Carville, who ran Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign. "This is not coming from some shoe clerk.''

Scott Reed, a Republican consultant who managed Bob Dole's 1996 presidential campaign, said Greenspan's words should be "a wake-up call'' for the party. "Republicans running for office from the courthouse to the White House have to go back to the basics of economic conservatism or they will be sent back to the stone ages in electoral politics,'' Reed said.

In the book, scheduled for release today, Greenspan, 81, wrote that he was dismayed to find soon after Bush took office in January 2001 that politics, not thoughtful policy making, drove the new president's economic agenda.

'Open-Handed Spending'

Bush's tax cuts were "unmatched by decreased spending, and, in the wake of September 11, still more open-handed spending,'' he wrote. "Little value was placed on rigorous economic policy debate or the weighing of long-term consequences.''

The federal budget went from a $128 billion surplus in 2001, when Bush took office, to a record deficit of $413 billion in fiscal 2004. The Congressional Budget Office projects the deficit will narrow to $158 billion this year.

The administration took issue with Greenspan's characterizations. "We're not going to apologize for increased spending to protect our national security,'' administration spokesman Tony Fratto said.

Republicans in Congress were no better, according to Greenspan, as they "seemed readily inclined to loosen the federal purse strings any time it might help add a few more seats to the Republican majority,'' he wrote.

Right Priorities

Regarding Clinton, Greenspan lauded him for balancing the budget and working toward stable economic growth and said he had the right priorities from the start.

"He seemed to pick up on my sense of urgency about the deficit and asked a lot of smart questions that politicians usually don't ask,'' Greenspan wrote of an early meeting. Clinton, a musician like Greenspan, cared about doing what was economically prudent, even if it wasn't popular, according to the book. The "saxophone wasn't the only thing we had in common,'' he wrote.

Greenspan also said he worked well with Clinton's advisers, particularly Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin and his successor, Larry Summers.

The Bush White House was run quite differently, with the treasury secretary serving merely as a spokesman for administration policy and with its emphasis on "loyalty and staying on message,'' according to the former Fed chairman.

Iraq War and Oil

In another potential embarrassment for Bush and the Republicans, Greenspan asserted that the need for secure oil supplies from the Middle East was the true rationale for the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.

"I'm saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: The Iraq war is largely about oil,'' Greenspan wrote in a chapter titled "The Long-Term Energy Squeeze.''

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates disputed that idea. "What we were going after was an aggressive dictator who was a destabilizing force in the entire region,'' Gates, defense chief since December, said yesterday on ABC's "This Week'' program.

Greenspan led the Fed for 18 years, from 1987 to January 2006, and is widely considered to have played a major role in engineering the 1991-2001 economic expansion, the longest in U.S. history. His stature assures that his views will cause a political reaction.

Republicans Respond

Republican presidential candidates sought to distance themselves from the targets of Greenspan's criticism.

"What Greenspan said ratifies what John McCain has been saying all along, we didn't control spending, which led not only to deficits, but to corruption,'' said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, chief economic adviser to the Arizona senator who is seeking the Republican presidential nomination.

Kevin Madden, spokesman for former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, another contender, said his candidate "has consistently and repeatedly pointed out that Republicans have to start acting like Republicans again on fiscal issues.''

Democrats, meanwhile, are seizing the opportunity.

"Those who want to stay the course on Bush's economic policy will have a much harder time in light of Alan Greenspan's book,'' said Roger Altman, founder of Evercore Partners Inc. and the chief economic adviser for the presidential campaign of New York Senator Hillary Clinton. "There couldn't be a more authoritative or credible critic.''

Senator Clinton "has already spoken out on the need to restore fiscal responsibility and how we compete in the global economy,'' her campaign strategist, Mark Penn, said when asked for comment on the book.

View on Hillary Clinton

Stepping further into the political campaign, Greenspan called Clinton, Bill Clinton's wife, "very smart'' and said she "wouldn't be a bad president'' in a Newsweek magazine interview released yesterday.

Leo Hindery, top economic adviser to former North Carolina Senator and presidential candidate John Edwards, said the candidate will likely make use of Greenspan's words in his campaign. "John is a big believer in balanced budgets,'' Hindery said.

Greenspan's condemnation of Bush and his party adds to Republican woes that already include an unpopular war in Iraq, a softening economy, and the scandal surrounding Idaho Republican Senator Larry Craig, who was arrested in June during a police investigation of lewd conduct in a Minneapolis-St. Paul airport.

Said Charlie Cook, independent analyst and publisher of the Cook Political Report in Washington: "Katrina, Iraq, deficits and now maybe the economy are damaging Republican's historic strength in this area, and the Greenspan book adds to it.''

By Matthew Benjamin, Bloomberg, September 17, 2007

The second largest New York state employee union has endorsed Senator Hillary Clinton in her bid for president.

The New York State Public Employees Federation announced Sept. 17 that its executive board had chosen Clinton, as did an overwhelming number of its membership who participated in an online poll. The union, which represents 57,000 professional, scientific, and technical employees, said that Clinton was committed to protecting the rights of employees and would strengthen the middle class.

With the endorsement, the union joins the largest New York state employee union, the Civil Service Employees Association, which endorsed Clinton on July 25.

The wife of former President Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton is seeking the democratic nomination for the 2008 presidential election. Clinton is announcing a $110 billion universal health coverage plan on Monday, according to news reports.

The Business Review, September 17, 2007

DES MOINES, Iowa (CNN) -- Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton announced a $110 billion health care reform plan Monday that would require all Americans to have health insurance.

Clinton unveiled her plan during a high-profile speech at a hospital in the key campaign state of Iowa, surrounded by supporters, American flags and campaign banners.

"Here in America people are dying because they couldn't get the care they needed when they were sick."

"I'm here today because I believe it is long past time that this nation had an answer," Clinton said. "I believe America is ready for change."

"It's time to provide quality affordable health care for every American," Clinton said. "And I intend to be the president who accomplishes that goal finally for our country."

Under the plan, federal subsidies would be provided for those who are not able to afford insurance, and large businesses would be required to provide or help pay for their employees' insurance.

About 46.6 million people in the United States were without health care insurance in 2005, including 8.3 million children, according to a U.S. Census Bureau report released last year.

"I know my Republican opponents will try to equate this plan with government-run health care. Well don't let them fool you again," Clinton said, explaining that her plan would allow participants to "keep the doctors you know and trust" while it would expand "personal choice" and keep costs down.

Clinton's package would also require insurers to provide coverage for anyone who applies for it and would also bar insurance companies from charging people with greater health care costs more for their premiums.

As first lady in 1993 and 1994, Clinton spearheaded an effort that would have overhauled the provision of health care. Critics compared her plan to socialized medicine, and it was killed by opposition from special-interest groups -- including doctors and pharmaceutical companies.

The campaign of fellow Democrat John Edwards, which has already put out a detailed a health care plan, will up the ante Monday during a speech to the Laborers' International Union of North America in Chicago, Illinois, campaign sources said. The Edwards proposal would cut off health care for the president, Congress and all political appointees in mid 2009, if a universal health care plan for all Americans has not been passed by then. Edwards is expected to outline "basic principles" the health care plan would have to meet, the sources said.




By Candy Crowley, CNN, September 17, 2007

In a presidential race in which uncertainty remains the order of the day, the leading Democratic candidates agree on at least one thing: no state's contest will be more important in determining the party's nominee than Iowa. Despite all the jockeying by other states to encroach upon Iowa's traditional first-in-the-nation caucuses, a win this time in Iowa is widely considered the essential prize for Democrats. That is why the candidates continue to visit the state regularly, opening up nearly 100 field offices around the state among them and spending time signing up supporters.

Much is still uncertain about Iowa's caucuses - from when exactly they will be held (on a date still to be determined, shortly after New Year's) to who is ahead in the essential task of building an organization and popular support in the state. Democrats are convinced Iowa is the key to the nomination, which has created a self-fulfilling prophecy: the more important Iowa becomes, the more the candidates visit and buy television advertising, raising the stakes even higher.

All this explains Sunday's extraordinary spectacle. In the middle of a field also used for an annual hot-air balloon festival, the six top Democratic candidates spoke to their biggest Iowa crowd of the campaign so far - organizers said it topped 14,000 people - delivering stump speeches with as much passion and energy as they could muster. It was an unusual setting, with the six candidates required to sit on the stage together and listen to each other's remarks, with open fields, farm equipment and a giant American flag serving as the backdrop.

The candidates came to the annual political fundraising event at the invitation of Iowa's Democratic Senator Tom Harkin, who has said he does not expect to endorse a candidate in the presidential race. Harkin has been holding his steak fry for 30 years, and it has been the scene of many memorable speeches, including one from Obama last year that effectively launched his political campaign. The steak fry is among the most anticipated and highly scrutinized Iowa political events leading up to the caucuses. This year, attendees paid $30 per ticket (many provided by the presidential campaigns themselves) to eat steak and beans, endure the strong sun, and hear the candidates of a party that is fired up about ending the war in Iraq and ending eight years of control of the White House by the Republicans.

The three leading candidates - Senator Hillary Clinton of New York, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, and former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina - each had hundreds of supporters on hand, creating the atmosphere of an outdoor political convention, with signs, campaign buttons and eager volunteers sporting campaign paraphernalia and chanting slogans.

The forum stressed unity over intra-party division. All the candidates expressed their disdain for Bush and a military conflict whose unpopularity fuels both Democratic anxiety about the state of the world and hope that the party will prevail in 2008; promises for universal health care and energy reform; and, above all, a powerful aspiration for change. The unusual unity of purpose and optimism, for a party used to being divided and often dispirited, was reflected in the crowd, whose fired-up members often cheered for the remarks of candidates not their own.

Obama, speaking first, directly addressed the primary question about his candidacy - whether he has enough experience to become the President in 16 months. He testified about his judgment and his character and reminded the crowd of his initial opposition to the war, a centerpiece of his candidacy. He also pledged for the first time to support future war funding bills in Congress only if they contain deadlines for bringing American troops home.

Clinton also tackled head on a major doubt about her: the prospect of a Clinton restoration leading to stalemate in Washington and a continuation of an old style of politics that many voters disdain. She repeated her campaign-trail pledge, "If you're ready for change, I'm ready to lead," and even cited the new book by former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, a Republican, which praises Bill Clinton's record on the economy.

Edwards, who is stronger in Iowa than he is nationally, has staked his candidacy on winning the caucuses and on a populist appeal meant to contrast with Clinton's more cautious centrist approach on health care, Iraq and the role of lobbyists. In the day's lone confrontational moment, he said that simply declaring yourself a candidate of change does not make it so. It was an apparent reference to Clinton, who sat right behind him on stage, though Obama may have felt the sting as well.

The next tier of candidates - New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd and Delaware Senator Joe Biden - spoke as well, but they did not have the same numbers of supporters on hand, hit on most of the same themes, and did not attempt to challenge the frontrunners directly. That will make it harder for them to break through. And breaking through in Iowa is what it is all about for the Democratic candidates, now and for the next four months.

By Mark Halperin, Time, September 16, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - More Democratic Party supporters in the United States want Hillary Rodham Clinton to become their presidential nominee next year, according to a poll by Opinion Dynamics released by Fox News. 43 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in a 2008 primary, up eight points since August.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 24 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 13 per cent. Support is lower for Delaware senator Joe Biden, Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich, and New Mexico governor Bill Richardson.

On Sept. 14, Edwards discussed his views on the coalition effort in Iraq, saying, "The tragedy of 9/11 had nothing to do with the war in Iraq. And the president's own administration has said so. The president needs to stop using the politics of fear and 9/11 to justify what is a failed strategy in Iraq."

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, September 16, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Many adults in the United States would avoid a presidential contender with specific religious traits, according to a poll by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. 61 per cent of respondents would be less likely to support a candidate who does not believe in God, and 45 per cent feel the same way about a Muslim.

In addition, 25 per cent of respondents would be less likely to vote for a Mormon in a presidential election, and fewer than 20 per cent would reject a candidate who is an evangelical Christian, Hispanic, a woman, Jewish, Catholic or black.

More than 10 per cent of respondents say they would be more likely to support an evangelical Christian, a woman or a Catholic presidential contender.

The next presidential election is scheduled for November 2008. The Democratic Party's candidates include Illinois senator Barack Obama, the son of a white mother and a black father; New York senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, who is the only woman in the race; and New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, the son of a Mexican mother. Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, a Mormon, is seeking the Republican Party's nomination.

On Sept. 12, Romney rejected the notion that his religion is a liability, saying, "Right now I am not terribly well known across the country. (...) In politics you can never say things are fine, but I don't believe my weaknesses will be related to my faith. I think they will find other places to attack me."

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, September 15, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Following his appearance on NBC's "The Tonight Show" to announce his bid for the Republican Party's presidential nomination, public support for actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson has increased in California, according to a poll by SurveyUSA. 28 per cent of respondents would vote for former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani in the Golden State's GOP primary, while 26 per cent would back Thompson.

Support for Thompson increased by seven points since August. On Sept. 5, Thompson said he would join the presidential race during a taping of "The Tonight Show" in Burbank. In August 2003, former actor and current California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced the start of his political career on the same television program.

Arizona senator John McCain is third on the list of GOP presidential hopefuls with 18 per cent, followed by former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney with 14 per cent.

In the sample of Democratic Party supporters, New York senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is still 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 numbers for the three main Democratic contenders are unchanged since August.

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.

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, September 15, 2007

LOS ANGELES (AP) - Hillary Rodham Clinton pursued votes Friday in the Los Angeles area's historical black heartland with basketball legend Earvin "Magic" Johnson at her side. Less than a week ago, her rival Barack Obama banked $3 million at a fundraiser at Oprah Winfrey's seaside estate.

For the two leading Democratic presidential contenders, the dueling events just six days apart highlighted the stiff competition for support and dollars within one of the party's key voter groups - blacks.

Johnson, the former Los Angeles Lakers star whose sprawling business interests range from movie theaters to health clubs, also held a fundraiser for Clinton at his Beverly Hills home Friday night. It was expected to be considerably smaller than the lavish event staged by Winfrey for Obama, an Illinois senator, on Sept. 8. Johnson's fundraiser was co-hosted by music industry heavyweights Quincy Jones, Berry Gordy and Clarence Avant, and scheduled guests included Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. Guests at the Obama event included Sidney Poitier, Forest Whitaker and Chris Rock.

The divided loyalties among blacks show "the community just isn't going to go lockstep behind any candidate, even a black one," said University of California, Los Angeles, political scientist Franklin D. Gilliam Jr. When it comes to competing celebrity endorsements, "I don't know if anybody stands equal with Oprah," Gilliam said. But Clinton, a New York senator, is not conceding the black vote to Obama and "she can compete for it in a legitimate way."

On Thursday, the California Legislature's black caucus endorsed Obama - but one of its eight members is backing Clinton. And independent polls in California suggest the black vote is divided, largely between Clinton and Obama.

Obama, whose late father was Kenyan, gives blacks a chance to put one of their own in the White House for the first time. But Clinton benefits from the strong relationship her husband, former President Bill Clinton, maintained with blacks for years.

"People in the black community love Bill Clinton; she's seen as comfortable in the community," Gilliam said. And "there's concern about Obama being electable, period, because he's black."

The rivalry between Obama and Clinton also showcases the clout of black political influence and money.

Obama has predicted that black voter turnout could swell by at least 30 percent if he wins the presidential nomination, giving Democrats victory in Southern states that have been voting Republican for decades.

Asked last month why she would be a better candidate for blacks when Obama was in the race, she cited her years of public service and advocacy, and described herself as the more experienced candidate. "My attitude is, I don't deserve anyone's vote. I have to earn everyone's vote," Clinton said.

At an event earlier Friday at a school in a heavily minority neighborhood near the Watts section, Clinton shared a stage with Johnson, Villaraigosa and other local leaders. She told a largely minority crowd including many students and supporters that she would bring a new style of leadership to Washington to take on issues like health care, education and ending the Iraq war.

"When I'm president, there will not be any invisible Americans," she said.

Several people in the audience said they were comfortable with Clinton, in large part because of her long record in the public eye and efforts in her husband's administration. John Bruce, 45, a Democrat from Los Angeles who works in security, said the black community is looking for leaders and Obama "seems to be heading in the right direction." Bruce, who is black, said race was not an issue in picking a candidate. He said he remains undecided on 2008 but added, "I'm an all-Clinton Democrat."

Black community activist "Sweet Alice" Harris, who is backing Clinton, said she worked closely with her during her days in the Clinton White House.

What about Obama? "I don't know him, but I know her," Harris said.

Earlier in the day, Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, D-Los Angeles, held a private fundraiser for Clinton at a Mexican restaurant in Lynwood, a Los Angeles suburb.

By Michael R. Blood, Associated Press, September 15, 2007

DETROIT (AP) - Debbie Stabenow first met Hillary Rodham Clinton in the early 1980s during a children's welfare panel discussion.

Stabenow was a state representative, Clinton a child advocacy attorney with a passion for protecting kids. Both Democrats now are U.S. senators, Stabenow representing Michigan and Clinton, New York.

"I said, this is somebody I want to get to know because it was somebody whose values I share," Stabenow said Saturday after officially endorsing her good friend's 2008 presidential bid.

By Corey Williams, Associated Press, September 15, 2007

NEW YORK (AP) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton was endorsed Saturday by retired Gen. Wesley Clark, who sought the party's nomination in 2004 and whose sterling military credentials could bolster her bid to be the first female commander in chief.

Clark, the former supreme allied commander of NATO, praised the New York senator as "a remarkable person" with the skills and experience to be president.

"She will be a great leader for the United States of America and a great commander in chief for the men and women in uniform," Clark told reporters in a conference call with the former first lady.

Clinton welcomed Clark's endorsement as a "real sign of confidence" in her ability to lead the military as president. "He and I have been friends for 25 years, and I am deeply admiring of his leadership," she said.

But Clinton also sidestepped questions about a newspaper ad by the liberal group MoveOn.org that criticized the top military commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus. She has refused to condemn the ad, which referred to Petraeus as "General Betray-Us." "I have repeatedly not only expressed my strong admiration and support for our men and women in uniform but with respect to General Petraeus, I have also made my respect for him abundantly clear and I think that speaks for itself," she said.

Clark, an early critic of the Iraq conflict, was drawn into the 2004 contest through an enthusiastic online draft movement. He dropped out in February of that year after a poor showing in the early primaries, but considered running again this time. A decorated career Army officer who graduated first in his class at West Point, Clark led the Operation Allied Force in the Kosovo war under President Clinton. Clark received numerous military commendations throughout his 34-year career and was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom. But his brief foray into presidential politics wasn't as successful.

His military credentials and forceful criticism of President Bush's handling of the Iraq war propelled him to the top of polls for a time. But he stumbled on his first full day as a candidate, saying he "probably" would have voted for the congressional resolution authorizing the Iraq invasion. Questions about that statement dogged him for the rest of the campaign. Clark has remained active in politics, running a political action committee, WESpac, and campaigning for Democratic candidates around the country.

Clinton and Clark share strong connections to Arkansas, where he attended high school in Little Rock. She joined the University of Arkansas Law School faculty and a Little Rock law firm before serving as first lady of Arkansas for 12 years while Bill Clinton, who grew up in Hope, Ark., was governor.

Hillary Clinton also gained an endorsement Saturday from Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow. The two women first met in the early 1980s when Stabenow was a state representative and Clinton was a child advocacy attorney.

"I said, this is somebody I want to get to know because it was somebody whose values I share," Stabenow said Saturday after officially endorsing her friend's presidential bid.

By Beth Fouhy, Associated Press, September 15, 2007

WASHINGTON - White men, conservatives, evangelicals and other pivotal building blocs of the Republican Party are divided among its leading contenders for president, leaving the race for the 2008 GOP nomination highly fluid, according to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll.

Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson are each attracting significant support from core GOP groups, based on the poll conducted this week. Even Sen. John McCain of Arizona, whose campaign has been staggered by money problems and staff shake-ups, is backed by solid shares of suburban, college-educated and Midwestern Republican voters.

The roughly one-third of Republicans in the poll who said they disapprove of the job President Bush is doing were gravitating around all three of those hopefuls. Overall, the survey underscores that no contender has yet to convincingly make the case that he is the candidate for change that so many voters want as the party searches for its identity and a successor to Bush.

"I like Rudy's stand on the war on terror, and I also like his leadership qualities and I don't just mean 9/11," said August Olivier, 61, a conservative Giuliani backer and retired automobile executive from Rochester, Mich. But he said he also liked Thompson and might change his mind, adding: "I'm not against him. We've got time. The poll showed the contest remains a virtual tie between Giuliani, the former New York mayor, at 24 percent and Thompson, the actor and former senator from Tennessee, at 19 percent. Not far behind at 15 percent is McCain while former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has 7 percent.

The numbers showed virtually no change since the last AP-Ipsos survey in July.

Lisa Baudoin, 40, a student and homemaker in Sugarland, Texas, said she is a conservative and supporting Thompson because of his views on abortion and immigration. She said she does not like Giuliani's more moderate immigration stance or his three marriages, and doesn't like McCain's opposition to the U.S. torturing terrorism suspects. "How are you going to get information? They don't play nice. Why do we have to if no one else is," she said.

Further highlighting how up for grabs the GOP race is, fully 22 percent of Republicans did not back a candidate. And when the handful of GOP voters backing former House Speaker Newt Gingrich of Georgia, who has not said he is running, are distributed to their second choices, they divide about evenly among Giuliani, Thompson and McCain. "People haven't coalesced around a particular candidate, or even one or two candidates, which is why this race is so wide open and why the winner will be determined by events that haven't happened yet," said Whit Ayres, a GOP pollster unaffiliated with any candidate.

In contrast, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York has a clear, across-the-board lead in the Democratic race over Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois by 34 percent to 20 percent, roughly the margin she has enjoyed for months. Lagging behind was former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina at 10 percent, while another 12 percent had no preference.

Clinton's lead stretched even more when Democrats supporting former Vice President Al Gore , who has not said he will run, are divided among their second choices. Then, she is ahead of Obama by 43 percent to 23 percent, with Edwards at 13 percent.

Besides being subject to change before Democrats and Republicans chose their tickets in 2008, this year's national polls have varied from some surveys in the important early voting states in the parties' nominating contests.

Several polls show Romney ahead in New Hampshire and Iowa and a jumbled GOP race in South Carolina. Meanwhile, Clinton leads in New Hampshire and South Carolina, but the three top Democrats have been more evenly matched in Iowa.

Among Republican voters in the national AP-Ipsos poll, Giuliani and Thompson each had about a quarter of those over 50, white males and married men. They also each had about one-fifth of conservatives, Southerners and evangelicals. Giuliani and McCain each had about one-fifth of white GOP women, and the top three candidates each had roughly equal shares of college-educated Republicans, Midwesterners, suburbanites and married women.

"He's gotten a good announcement, a good launch, a great reception on the campaign trail," John McLaughlin, Thompson's pollster, said of the former senator, who formally announced his candidacy last week. Giuliani spokeswoman Maria Comella cited his leads in recent national polling and said, "It couldn't be more clear that Rudy's record of results, proven executive experience and grasp of the issues has real staying power."

The poll was conducted from Sept. 10-12 and involved telephone interviews with 1,000 adults. It had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

The survey included interviews with 482 Democrats, for whom the margin of sampling error was plus or minus 4.5 percentage points. For the 358 Republicans surveyed, the margin of sampling error was plus or minus 5 percentage points.

By Alan Fram, Associated Press, September 14, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Hillary Rodham Clinton remains the most popular contender in the race for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination in the United States, according to a poll by Opinion Research Corporation released by CNN. 39 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in a 2008 primary.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 20 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 15 per cent, and former U.S. vice-president Al Gore with 13 per cent. Support is lower for New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich, Delaware senator Joe Biden, and former Alaska senator Mike Gravel.

Yesterday, Biden discussed his chances, saying, "I believe, at the end of the day, one of the major issues for the people of Iowa to consider me, and the other candidates is, our electability nationwide. Will we be able to go into those 30 states we've consistently lost the last eight years and be able to generate genuine support and have an opportunity to compete in 15 of those states? You cannot govern this country merely by winning the same 20 states plus one. That will give you enough electoral votes, but it will not give you the mandate you need."

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, September 14, 2007

WASHINGTON -- -- Gayle Moore, an Iowa nurse, wants U.S. troops "out, out, out" of Iraq as soon as possible. Darleen McCarthy of South Carolina fears that Iraq is turning into "another Vietnam."

But when these two Democrats vote in January to help decide their party's 2008 presidential nominee, neither plans to support the self-styled antiwar candidates. Instead, they are siding with the one top contender who voted to authorize the invasion and has refused to apologize for that -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

"It's just a gut feeling," said Moore, 53, a mother of five. "It's her experience."

A new Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll of voters in key early primary states reveals that Moore and McCarthy are hardly alone. They represent a paradox of the race for the Democratic presidential nomination: Although a plurality of Democratic voters considers the Iraq war to be the most pressing issue facing the candidates, the more hawkish Clinton has found a sweet spot in the debate.

Many of those voters who want an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops support her candidacy and consider her best able to end the war, as do many who back a more gradual drawdown.

"It's just the way Hillary Clinton handles herself," said McCarthy, 55, who lives near Myrtle Beach. "She says what she wants, and I think she'll let the American people know exactly what's going on."

The findings help explain why the New York senator has built a strong lead over Democratic rivals who have made their opposition to the war the centerpiece of their campaigns -- and who have laid out more-detailed plans for quicker troop reductions.

Former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina began his campaign by declaring his 2002 authorization vote a "mistake." Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois frequently notes that, though he was a state legislator at the time, he opposed the war from the beginning. New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson has called for an immediate troop withdrawal. Obama tried again Wednesday to turn his war stance to his advantage, delivering a speech in Iowa that called for a troop drawdown to begin immediately and be completed next year. He did not mention Clinton's name, but ridiculed "conventional thinking in Washington" that he said "lined up for war" and led Congress to support President Bush's plans because lawmakers feared the political consequences of doing otherwise. "I made a different judgment," Obama said.

But the new survey results suggest that even if Obama's views more closely match those of many primary and caucus voters, he is not necessarily going to benefit.

The poll, which surveyed registered voters who planned to turn out for the primaries or caucuses in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, found that a plurality of Democratic primary or caucus voters in each state thought Clinton would be "the best at ending the war in Iraq" -- 33% in Iowa, 32% in New Hampshire and 36% in South Carolina. Clinton holds substantial leads even among voters who listed the war as the top priority facing the candidates.

Supervised by Times Poll director Susan Pinkus, the survey was conducted last Thursday through Monday, and has an overall margin of sampling error of plus or minus 5 percentage points; among the Iowa Democrats it was 4 percentage points.

Clinton won support from 36% of New Hampshire Democratic primary voters who said they wanted U.S. troops withdrawn "as soon as possible"; by contrast, 14% of those voters backed Obama and 12% favored Edwards. Clinton also led among those in that group who said they supported more-gradual withdrawal plans and who backed remaining in Iraq until the war is won.

The numbers were similar on that front in South Carolina. And in Iowa, where the overall race is tighter, Clinton was essentially tied with Edwards in support from Democratic voters wanting an immediate pullout of troops from Iraq. But among those same voters, 33% said Clinton was the best candidate to end the war, compared with just 6% for Edwards.

Democratic pollster Dave Beattie, who is not affiliated with a campaign, said Clinton's rivals risked reaching a "point of diminishing returns" if they focused too heavily on differences between them and Clinton on Iraq. Most voters, he said, are not concerned about the differences, given that each candidate is essentially critical of the war and promises to end it.

Critics have accused Clinton of failing to present a specific plan to end the war and of being slow to commit to a full pullout. She has said that as president she would end the war, and she used a speech this summer to pledge that if elected, she would consult her advisors and draw up a plan to begin drawing down troops within 60 days of her inauguration. She reiterated that stance Wednesday, unleashing a stinging attack on Bush's leadership before his prime-time address on the war set for tonight.

"None of the Democratic candidates has a position that is outside the realm of acceptable for what the Democratic electorate is looking for," Beattie said, even though "it may not be their absolute favorite position."

Harrison Hickman, Edwards' campaign pollster, acknowledged that at least for now, voters were not seeing specific differences among the candidates on the war. "If they don't see a lot of differences, it's hard to say those issues are driving the campaign," he said.

Analysts said that Clinton's strength even among war opponents resulted from a perception that, as a senator and a former first lady, she has the best experience to be president -- a category she dominated in the three early states surveyed by the Times/Bloomberg poll.

Several respondents said Wednesday that they liked her for other reasons that trumped the war: her husband, the former president; and the idea of electing a woman to the White House.

Also, the survey reflects the Clinton campaign's efforts over the last six months to refocus the Iraq debate on a future of troop reductions -- an area of agreement among the candidates -- rather than on her 2002 vote. As a result, the debate over the war has shifted from a potential disadvantage for Clinton to an asset, her advisors say. "It's an issue, and she's winning the issue," said Mark Penn, Clinton's pollster.

Strategists for Clinton's rivals dispute that notion, contending that the war continues to serve as a case against her. The campaign is early, they said, and her rivals still have time to paint her 2002 vote as indicative of poor judgment. "Any suggestion that the Iraq war is a settled issue in this primary would be dangerously wrong," said David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager.

But, like many voters in the early states, Jean Corson of Exeter, N.H., said she was far more focused on the future than on the past.

"I'm very disappointed that Clinton didn't move more aggressively earlier on, but at this point, I believe that whoever gets elected will have to get the troops out of Iraq," she said.

Explaining why she will back Clinton, Corson said: "She's smart. She knows how the system works."



By Peter Wallsten, Los Angeles Times, September 13, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Hillary Rodham Clinton has increased her lead in the race for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination in the United States, according to a poll by Gallup released by USA Today. 45 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in a 2008 primary, up three points since mid-August.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 24 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 16 per cent. Support is lower for Delaware senator Joe Biden, New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich, Connecticut senator Chris Dodd, and former Alaska senator Mike Gravel.

On Sept. 11, Kucinich discussed his views on the coalition effort, saying, "Not only must we stabilize, we must pay reparations to Iraq for the people of Iraq, for the great human tragedy caused. Perhaps a million innocent Iraqis lost lives as a result of this war."

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, September 13, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton holds the upper hand against two prospective Republican presidential nominees in the United States, according to a poll by Opinion Research Corporation released by CNN. 50 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator, while 46 per cent would support former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani.

Support for Rodham Clinton in this match-up increased by one point since June, while backing for Giuliani fell by two points. In a separate contest, Rodham Clinton holds a 13-point advantage over actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson.

Illinois senator Barack Obama trails Giuliani by four points, and leads Thompson by 12 points.

On Sept. 11, Rodham Clinton urged for a new strategy in the fight against terrorism, saying, "We get very little comfort from the fact that the mastermind of that mass murder (the 9/11 attacks) is at large, neither captured nor killed. And that the Taliban and al-Qaeda, are resurging in Afghanistan. And their network is certainly-if not tightly organized-a loose confederacy that has grave consequences for us."

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, September 13, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton holds a slight advantage over three prospective Republican rivals in the Old Dominion State, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. At least 44 per cent of respondents in Virginia would support the New York senator in head-to-head 2008 United States presidential contests.

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

In 2004, Republican George W. Bush carried Virginia's 13 electoral votes, with 54 per cent of all cast ballots. No Democrat has carried the Old Dominion State since Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964.

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, September 13, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton could defeat three prospective Republican rivals in Minnesota, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. At least 50 per cent of respondents in the North Star State would vote for the New York senator in head-to-head 2008 United States presidential contests.

Rodham Clinton holds a 13-point lead over former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, an 11-point advantage over actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson, and an 18-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.

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, September 13, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Hillary Rodham Clinton remains the favourite presidential contender for Democratic Party supporters in the United States, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. 41 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in a 2008 primary.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 20 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 17 per cent, New Mexico governor Bill Richardson with four per cent, Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich with three per cent, and Delaware senator Joe Biden also with three per cent.

Yesterday, Biden called for the end of the coalition effort in Iraq during the testimony of commander of the Multi-National Force - Iraq David Petraeus and U.S. ambassador in Iraq Ryan Crocker to the U.S. Congress, saying, "The American military cannot sustain a war in Iraq with no end in sight at the levels we're there now. It's time to turn the corner, in my view. We should stop the surge and start bringing our troops home."

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, September 12, 2007

Sept. 12 (Bloomberg) -- Hillary Clinton is dominating the Democratic presidential field among lower-income and older voters in early primary states, while Republican Fred Thompson is making inroads among religious voters, particularly in the South and at the expense of rival Mitt Romney.

A Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll conducted this month in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina reveals strengths and weaknesses for each candidate within powerful voting groups. Polling trends in these states are closely watched because they plan to hold the nation's first voting contests next January.

In all three states, New York Senator Clinton, 59, appeals to individuals in households earning less than $40,000 as well as those over the age of 65. Illinois Senator Barack Obama, 46, her main rival for the Democratic nomination, fares better among younger voters in Iowa.

"Clinton's demographics are just what you want, because it is in fact older voters who actually exercise their vote more,'' said Steffen Schmidt, a political science professor at Iowa State University in Ames. Her association with "universal health care probably is very important'' to lower-income workers, he said.

In Iowa, where Clinton is locked in a tight race with Obama and former North Carolina Senator John Edwards, 37 percent of Democratic voters 65 and older support her, far more than her two rivals.

Older Voters

Clinton's lead in this age group is even more striking in New Hampshire and South Carolina. Forty-eight percent of older voters in South Carolina support Clinton, while 3 percent favor Obama. In New Hampshire, 44 percent of those voters support Clinton, while 8 percent back Obama.

Barbara Army, 74, a retired electronics worker from Nashua, New Hampshire, said in a follow-up interview that she trusts Clinton to fix "messes'' such as health care and education. "She knows what needs to be done and she will get it done,'' Army said.

The poll of 1,079 registered voters in Iowa, 1,312 voters in New Hampshire and 820 voters in South Carolina was conducted Sept. 6-10. The margin of sampling error is from 3 to 5 percentage points.

On the Republican side, while general trends aren't as clear, the religious right -- defined in the poll as self- described religious fundamentalists, Christian conservatives and people who take the Bible literally -- is hurting Romney, 60, in South Carolina, where they wield more clout than in Iowa and New Hampshire.

'Looking Elsewhere'

"Despite Romney's best efforts, the Christian right is still looking elsewhere for a candidate,'' said Allan Lichtman, a political science professor at American University in Washington. Among the religious right in South Carolina, Romney, a Mormon, trails former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, 63, Arizona Senator John McCain, 71, and Thompson, a former Tennessee senator who announced his candidacy last week. Thompson, 65, leads with 31 percent, followed by Giuliani with 20 percent, McCain with 15 percent and Romney with 8 percent. Romney also is behind those candidates within South Carolina's broader pool of Republican voters.

Romney, a former Massachusetts governor who is leading the Republican field overall in Iowa and New Hampshire, generally fares better among upper-income and elderly voters, the poll shows. In Iowa, Romney is running about even with Giuliani among voters belonging to the religious right and has a huge lead among Republicans who aren't in that group. The religious right isn't a factor in New Hampshire.

'Mormonism'

"I see Mormonism as a cult, instead of a branch of Christianity,'' said Valarie Harper, 56, who works part-time in a flower shop in West Columbia, South Carolina, and described herself as a Christian conservative. Older and younger voters in New Hampshire are evenly split between Romney and Giuliani: thirty-four percent of respondents 65 and older favor Romney and 37 percent between the ages of 18 and 44 support Giuliani.

Among the Democratic candidates, Obama, who campaigns as the candidate of change, fares slightly better than Clinton and Edwards with younger voters in Iowa.

Clinton leads Obama and Edwards among households earning less than $40,000 in all three states. She has a double-digit advantage in South Carolina and New Hampshire.

In Iowa, Edwards, 54, gets a boost among union members, who make up 11 percent of the workforce, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Edwards, who has received four union endorsements, is supported by 37 percent of respondents in this category, while 23 percent favor Clinton and 12 percent support Obama. Clinton has picked up at least three union endorsements.

While Obama is the first African-American to have a serious chance at winning the Democratic nomination, Clinton is drawing more support from black voters in South Carolina, with 43 percent, compared with 32 percent for Obama. Clinton also registers better with white voters there, garnering 51 percent, while 15 percent support Obama.

By Julianna Goldman, Bloomberg, September 12, 2007

Reminders of his leadership in the days after Sept. 11 may not be enough to guarantee Rudy Giuliani the Republican nomination.

Despite the presidential hopeful's lead among the Republican pack in recent months, the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll suggests an unexpected down shift for the front-runner. The former New York mayor slipped nine percentage points nationally, tumbling from 37 percent in July to 28 percent today.

Though Giuliani rated better with Republicans concerned more about major terrorist attacks, among those less focused on terrorism he is in a dead heat with former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson, who was the choice of 19 percent of those polled.

Giuliani's drop also may mean good news for the beleaguered Arizona Sen. John McCain, who seems to have stabilized his downward motion over the last few months. The poll has him at 18 percent. Meanwhile, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney holds steady in the poll at 10 percent.

The change in numbers could mean that the campaign gloves will soon begin to come off. "The ones below them sort of have to take shots that they may have not taken four months ago or six months ago," said ABC News consultant Torie Clark.

The Outlook for Democrats

While the Republican candidates have seen a change in popularity status among their base, the Democratic candidates' results have been static by comparison.

Former first lady and New York Sen. Hillary Clinton has led Illinois Sen. Barack Obama by between 14 percentage points and 16 percentage points since February. Clinton garnered 41 percent while Obama had 27 percent. Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards trails behind with only 14 percent.

How Poll Numbers Influence Iraq

Obama's lag in the polls didn't stop him and other candidates from trying to capitalize on Gen. David Petraeus' report on Iraq earlier this week.

"This continues to be a disastrous foreign policy mistake," Obama said.

But such critical comments may be dangerous for the front-runners, who must appear respectful to voters while still being opinionated.

"Despite what I view as your rather extraordinary efforts in your testimony both yesterday and today, I think that the reports that you provide to us really require the willing suspension of disbelief," Clinton said.

At this week's congressional hearing, McCain showed support for Petraeus. Some believe Iraq's top commander's respectable job of presenting the administration's case will be a boon for McCain, who continually has backed the war effort.

ABC News, September 12, 2007

WASHINGTON - Rudolph W. Giuliani has been well ahead of his rivals for the Republican presidential nomination in nationwide polls, but he is far weaker in the crucial states that will cast early votes in the nominating process next year, according to a new Los Angeles Times/ Bloomberg poll that underscores how unsettled the GOP race remains. Among Republican voters, Giuliani, the former mayor of New York, trails Mitt Romney in Iowa and New Hampshire, and he lags behind Fred Thompson in South Carolina. However, Giuliani is only a few points behind the leader in New Hampshire and South Carolina -- within the poll's margin of error -- suggesting that the race in those two states is too tight for anyone to be declared a clear front-runner.

In a worrisome finding for all the Republican candidates, the poll also found that many GOP voters in those key states are only lightly committed to their choices: Though they have been showered with attention by the campaigns, a sizable 72% of Iowa Republicans who say they favor a candidate also say they may decide to back someone else.

Among Democrats in those three states, the race is more firmly settled: The poll found that New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has consolidated her lead on a sturdy foundation of support among women, blacks and, in some states, labor union households. And while Clinton previously had established leads in New Hampshire and South Carolina, she now appears to be gaining momentum in Iowa, long considered friendly territory for former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards.

The poll surveyed registered voters who planned to vote in the three early primaries or caucuses. Supervised by Times Poll Director Susan Pinkus, it was conducted Sept. 6-10, just after Thompson officially joined the Republican race. The margin of sampling error was plus or minus 5 percentage points; among Iowa Democrats it was 4 percentage points.

Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina are three of the most important states that start the presidential voting season in January. Hotly contested races in both parties have prompted the candidates to focus most intently on those three states, believing victories there will provide momentum to win in the bigger states that follow.

Key findings about the Republican front-runners are:

* In Iowa, Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, posts a solid lead, with support from 28% of GOP voters. Giuliani and Thompson trail with 16% each. Arizona Sen. John McCain's faltering campaign drew 7% in the survey.

* In New Hampshire, Romney tops Giuliani 28% to 23%, a lead that is within the poll's margin of error. McCain, who won the New Hampshire primary in 2000, is backed by 12%. Thompson drew 11%, showing little bounce from his splashy national campaign announcement via late-night television and webcast.

* In South Carolina, where Thompson is hoping to trade on his Southern roots, the former Tennessee senator leads Giuliani 26% to 23%, within the poll's margin of error. The result is a reversal from a Times/Bloomberg survey in June, when Giuliani outpolled Thompson.

Taken together, the results underscore that voters who have had the closest view of the Republican field see the race far differently than do voters nationwide. Though Giuliani has built no clear lead in any early-voting state, he tops his closest competitor, Thompson, with a nearly 9-point margin in national polls, according to an analysis of multiple surveys by the website Pollster.com.

The Times/Bloomberg survey also reveals that Republicans remain dissatisfied with their field of candidates, even after Thompson's long-awaited entry into the race. In South Carolina, 28% of Republicans are dissatisfied with the party's candidates.

"This is a really scary election for a Republican," John Haley, an Iowa butcher who participated in the poll, said in a follow-up interview. "I'm not feeling confident."

The results from early-voting states will probably encourage Romney, who started out as one of the least-known of the Republican contenders and has invested heavily in campaigning in Iowa and New Hampshire. The bet seems to be paying off with strong showings in those two states. The poll also provides a window into what voters in those states like about Romney.

Some 23% of Iowa Republicans rank Romney as the candidate most likely to be the strongest leader -- a remarkable challenge to Giuliani, chosen by 21%, because Giuliani has made leadership strength his calling card. One-fifth of Iowa Republicans also choose Romney as the candidate who would be best on social issues, a larger share than any other candidate. That is striking, because Romney has had to labor to convince religious conservatives that he has abandoned his past support for abortion rights.

The South Carolina results indicate that, at least in that state, Thompson has made headway in his strategy of appealing to the party's conservative wing: 31% of South Carolina's religious-right voters support Thompson; Giuliani runs second with 20% of their votes.

Although the poll found that Giuliani's national popularity has not translated into big leads in these key states, it did find many measures of his political strength. He is seen by many Republicans -- even those who don't back his candidacy -- as the most electable candidate. In South Carolina, 31% of Republicans say he is the candidate most likely to beat the Democratic nominee, even though only 23% name him as their first choice. And Giuliani is identified in each of the three states as the candidate who would be best in fighting terrorism, the issue that is a top priority for Republican primary voters.

On the Democratic side, the poll results show that Clinton's top rivals have so far not succeeded in their recent efforts to portray her as too much of an insider to foster change in the country.

To the contrary, voters in the three early states sometimes view her rivals as more likable and more likely to offer new ideas -- yet they seem to place greater emphasis on Clinton's perceived experience and her ability to deal with Iraq and terrorism.

Clinton holds leads in all three states, despite factors in each that have been considered advantages for her opponents:

* In Iowa, where Edwards has been strong in the past, Clinton leads him by 5 percentage points, 28% to 23%, whereas Illinois Sen. Barack Obama wins support from 19% of voters.

* In New Hampshire, which has been considered favorable ground for Obama given his past appeal among upscale and well-educated white voters, Clinton's lead is more stark. More primary voters there support her than Edwards and Obama combined.

* In South Carolina, where Obama's campaign has hoped to rally support from the state's large black population, Clinton continues to beat him among nearly every constituency, including blacks. Edwards, meanwhile, who touts the fact that he was born in South Carolina and won that state's primary as a candidate in 2004, wins only 7% among South Carolina Democrats -- suggesting that he, like Obama, is failing to gain traction against what is looking more and more like a Clinton juggernaut.

"On foreign affairs, I think Clinton's stronger. On security, I think she's stronger," said Dana Cote, 64, a retired registered nurse who lives in Columbia, S.C. Cote was among the 34% of South Carolina Democrats who named Obama as the candidate of "new ideas," compared with 27% for Clinton. But like Cote, nearly one-third of the South Carolinians who praised Obama on that front said they would actually vote for Clinton, anyway. Obama "hasn't got enough experience," he said. "You've got to be dirty to play politics. And he hasn't gotten dirty enough."

Across the board, Clinton is either winning every major voter category or is competitive with Obama among groups that have favored him in the past, even the upscale voters who helped fuel his rise in national polls. Obama holds slight leads among college graduates in Iowa and South Carolina -- a proven strength for him in the past. But Clinton leads among those voters in New Hampshire. The survey suggests that Clinton has closed that gap by courting college-educated women, among whom she is either tied with Obama or ahead in the three states.

Even among South Carolina's black voters, who are expected to make up about half of the Democratic primary electorate there, the prospect of electing the country's first black president has not yet emerged as an advantage for the Illinois senator. Obama wins only about one-third of the black vote, compared with 43% for Clinton and 18% who don't yet know.

That spells trouble for Obama, who clearly has not closed the deal with this core constituency. "I don't look at color or gender. I'm listening for who I believe will help us, the ordinary retired government worker who's struggling here on a fixed income," said poll respondent Nolie Bell, 70, of Irmo, S.C. She called Obama "an interesting person" but said she was planning to vote for Edwards. "I think it's about time that we get an African American president," added Bell, who is black. "But when I listen to all of them, I'm still more impressed by Edwards."

Diane McClave, a 76-year-old retiree who lives in the tiny northern New Hampshire town of Jackson, said she was amazed by Obama's charisma when he recently held a town hall meeting in a nearby school gym. But she said she continued to lean toward Clinton.

"She is of the female persuasion," McClave said. "And she seems understandable. Some politicians have a tendency to speak in tongues, I think, and I'm never too sure what they're saying."



By Janet Hook and Peter Wallsten, Los Angeles Times, September 12, 2007

Clinton picked up the endorsement of the 300,000-member National Association of Letter Carriers in Washington today.

"In the primary elections next year, you can count on letter carriers to deliver for Senator Clinton, and I am confident that in the years to come, President Hillary Clinton will deliver for every citizen throughout America," NALC President William Young said in a statement.

Young said Clinton was the best prepared to fight for universal health insurance and to strengthen Social Security. "Hillary Clinton has the strength and experience to deliver the change we need. She's ready to lead this country from her first day in the White House."

The NALC, affiliated with the AFL-CIO, represents city letter carriers employed by the U.S. Postal Service in all 50 states and U.S. jurisdictions.

Other recent endorsements: Earilier this month, Sen. Clinton picked up the endorsement of the Transportation Communications Union, which has 65,000 active and retired members, mostly employed in the railroad industry.

Last month, the campaign announced the endorsement of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, which represents over 700,000 active and retired members in airline, aerospace, manufacturing, railroad, woodworking and shipbuilding industries.

The United Transportation Union also endorsed the senator last month. The UTU represents 125,000 active and retired members in the railroad, bus and public transit sectors across America.

By Athena Jones, MSNBC, September 12, 2007

A new poll of likely New Hampshire voters by the Los Angeles Times and Bloomberg News confirms Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney continue to lead their parties in the Granite State.

But interestingly the same poll also showed that John Edwards and Barack Obama are tied for second among Democrats, a sign while Obama's poll numbers haven't moved much all summer, Edwards could be benefiting from a number of recent campaign stops.

For Democrats, Hillary had 35 percent compared to the 16 percent tied among Edwards and Obama. Richardson came in fourth with 8 percent.

Romney led Republicans with 28 percent to Rudy Giuliani's 23 percent and John McCain's 12 percent. Mike Huckabee had 6 percent.

The poll was taken Sept. 6-10 and asked 618 Democratic primary voters for a margin of error of 3 percent. For Republicans, 412 likely voters were polled for a margin of error of 5 percent.

By James Pindell, The Boston Globe, September 12, 2007

THE RACE: The presidential primary in New Hampshire for Republicans and Democrats.

THE NUMBERS - DEMOCRATS

Hillary Rodham Clinton, 35 percent

Barack Obama, 16 percent

John Edwards, 16 percent

Bill Richardson, 8 percent

THE NUMBERS - REPUBLICANS

Mitt Romney, 28 percent

Rudy Giuliani, 23 percent

John McCain, 12 percent

Fred Thompson, 11 percent

Mike Huckabee, 6 percent

OF INTEREST:

Among Republicans, Romney is slightly ahead of Giuliani. On the question of which candidate would be the strongest leader, 31 percent picked Giuliani, followed by 25 percent for Romney. However, when asked who would be the best to fight terrorism, McCain placed second to Giuliani, 22 percent to 34 percent. And on social issues such as abortion and gay rights, Romney and Giuliani are about even, with 25 percent of GOP voters saying Giuliani would be best followed by 23 percent for Romney.

Clinton's message of experience has given her a lead when voters are asked who they pick for president and who has the right experience to be president; 47 percent of Democrats said she has the experience, even among voters who don't plan to vote for her. John Edwards and Bill Richardson come in next, with 10 percent each; Obama posts 8 percent on the experience question. But when Democrats have to pick their second choice for president, Obama leads with 23 percent. Obama also leads among Democrats when asked who has new ideas; 35 percent say he has them, twice as many who pick Clinton's 17 percent. And 40 percent of Democratic voters agree new ideas is a top priority; 31 percent say experience is their top concern.

The Los Angeles Times/ Bloomberg poll surveyed 1,312 New Hampshire voters from Sept. 6-10, with a sampling error margin of plus or minus 3 percentage points. It included 618 Democratic primary voters with a sampling error margin of plus or minus 5 percentage points, and 430 Republican primary voters with a sampling error margin of plus or minus 5 percentage points.

Associated Press, September 12, 2007

Sept. 11 (Bloomberg) -- Hillary Clinton has established a clear lead over her Democratic competitors in the early U.S. primary states, while the race for the Republican presidential nomination remains open.

A new Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll finds the biggest surprise among Republicans is that Fred Thompson, who entered the contest just last week, is ahead in South Carolina, followed closely by Rudy Giuliani and then John McCain. Mitt Romney is on top in Iowa, with Giuliani and Thompson tied for second, and in New Hampshire, with Giuliani, the former mayor of New York, a close second.

On the Democratic side, Clinton holds a narrow advantage over John Edwards and Barack Obama in Iowa. In New Hampshire and South Carolina she has a commanding lead over Obama and Edwards, a native Southerner who won South Carolina's primary in 2004.

"The Democrats seem to have more of a consensus on who they want to be their candidate, and it looks like Clinton has taken that moniker for the moment,'' said Susan Pinkus, polling director for the Los Angeles Times. "For the Republicans, they're all over the place.''

Clinton, a senator from New York, was the leader when she joined the race in January and has only gained momentum since then. Few frontrunners in recent American politics have displayed such steady strength, although a couple -- Democrat Walter Mondale in 1983-84 and Republican George W. Bush in 1999-2000 -- eventually stumbled before winning the nomination.

Strong Leaders

In all three states, the popularity of Clinton, 59, and Giuliani, 63, is fueled by perceptions that they are strong leaders and the best able to deal with national security and terrorism issues.

On the Republican side, McCain, 71, an Arizona senator, does best on handling the war in Iraq and Romney, 60, a former Massachusetts governor, on keeping taxes low; for Democrats, Obama, 46, an Illinois senator, tops frontrunner Clinton on new ideas and is generally considered more likeable.

New Hampshire, Iowa and South Carolina are expected to hold the nation's first electoral contests, so polling trends there are often considered a better guide on the direction of presidential races than many national polls.

The Sept. 6-10 poll was conducted of 1,079 registered voters in Iowa, 1,312 voters in New Hampshire and 820 in South Carolina. The margin of sampling error is from 3 to 5 percentage points.

Health Care, Iraq

In the three states, Clinton leads by a wide margin on most issues, including fighting terrorism, protecting national security and ending the Iraq war. She is also the Democrat seen as having the best chance of beating the eventual Republican nominee in the November 2008 presidential election.

Susan Rainville, a 61-year-old retired federal employee, said in a followup interview that she associates Clinton with the issues she cares about most.

"She's trying to do something on health care and to end the war in Iraq,'' said Rainville of Lake Sunapee, New Hampshire. "It's also her experience. She's been in politics for 35 years.''

Clinton leads Edwards, 54, a former senator from North Carolina, 28 percent to 23 percent in Iowa. She is ahead of Obama and Edwards by 35 percent to 16 percent each in New Hampshire and tops Obama by a 45 percent to 27 percent margin in South Carolina.

Not All Bad

Even though Obama trails Clinton significantly, it's not all bad news for him. In all three states, he was the voters' second choice, so if other candidates falter he could be the biggest beneficiary in a two-way contest against Clinton. He also does well on some important issues. He beats Clinton by about a 2-to-1 margin in New Hampshire and Iowa, and by 7 points in South Carolina on which candidate has new ideas. Overall, more Democrats say it's important for a presidential candidate to have fresh ideas than experience.

Edwards has built his entire campaign around appeals to working-class voters, especially unions. He has also invested much of his energy campaigning in Iowa, betting that a win there will be a springboard for him to victory in other states.

Yet in all three early-voting states he is behind Clinton when Democrats are asked to pick which candidate understands them best.

Vicki Greene, a 51-year-old assembly worker from Nodaway, Iowa, said Edwards is having a hard time matching Clinton's star power both because of her husband, former President Bill Clinton, and her chance to become the first female president.

"We've tried the guys,'' said Greene, who is changing her registration to Democrat from Republican. "She's a woman and I'd like to see her in there.''

Thompson First

On the Republican side, Thompson, 65, a former senator from Tennessee, is leading in South Carolina, where previous surveys had given Giuliani the edge. Still, Giuliani, at 23 percent, remains just 3 percentage points behind Thompson in South Carolina, within the poll's margin of error. McCain scores 15 percent and Romney just 9 percent. John Smith, a 62-year-old retired truck driver from Moncks, South Carolina, said he backs Thompson because he wants a strong social conservative to enter the field. "One of my big concerns right now is abortion and gay rights,'' he said. "We need to do everything we can to stop it,'' said Smith, who believes Thompson has "more conservative values'' than Giuliani or McCain, and that "Romney is a governor of a state that let same-sex marriage happen.''

Last-Minute Candidate

Thompson's long-awaited campaign announcement didn't move his numbers much in Iowa and New Hampshire, where Romney continues to hold the lead. Jessica Holst, a 32-year-old homemaker who said family values are the most important issue for her, supports Romney. That's because he has a "better chance of winning'' than Thompson, she said. "I'm not too sure of Fred Thompson," said Holst, who lives in Eldridge, Iowa. "If you're going to be running for president it's not something you can do at the last minute.''

Iowa is Romney's strongest state, where he gets 28 percent of the vote, compared with 16 percent for both Giuliani and Thompson. Some of Romney's lead is also a result of voter perceptions of his handling of tax issues. In Iowa, he leads Giuliani by 12 percentage points and in New Hampshire tops him by 9 points. In New Hampshire, Romney is ahead of Giuliani by 5 percentage points, with McCain in third place at 12 percent.

McCain Lags

McCain remains well behind the competition in all three states, even though he carried New Hampshire in the 2000 Republican primary. The war in Iraq is the one issue where McCain retains an advantage, leading in all three states. That lead is offset by his much lower ratings on issues ranging from taxes to Republicans' impressions of which candidate is best equipped to beat the Democrats.

In all three states, Giuliani has a wide lead over his competitors on terrorism, and Republican voters say he is the strongest leader overall. Republican confusion over which candidate is the best on social issues may contribute to the party's failure to coalesce around any single contender.

In Iowa and South Carolina, where Republicans weigh heavily such topics as abortion and gay marriage, a plurality of party voters say they aren't sure which candidate would be best on social issues. Romney got more support for his leadership on those matters in Iowa, and Thompson and Giuliani were virtually tied in South Carolina. Giuliani is pro-abortion and gay rights.

Democrats Satisfied

The poll suggests Democrats are more satisfied with their top-tier choices than are Republicans.

In South Carolina, 63 percent of Republicans are satisfied with their choices, compared with 83 percent of Democrats who say the same. There were similar results in Iowa and New Hampshire.

In all three states, Democrats express a higher level of interest in the campaigns than do Republicans. For example, 45 percent of Iowa Democrats say they have been very interested in following the presidential race, compared with just 29 percent of the state's Republicans who voiced that view.

By Heidi Przybyla, Bloomberg, September 11, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Fred Thompson and Rudy Giuliani are virtually even in South Carolina, according to a poll by Clemson University. 19 per cent of Republican Party supporters in the Palmetto State would vote for the actor and former Tennesee senator in next year's United States presidential primary, while 18 per cent would back the former New York City mayor.

Arizona senator John McCain is third with 15 per cent, followed by former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney with 11 per cent. Support is lower for former House of Representatives speaker Newt Gingrich, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, and Texas congressman Ron Paul.

In the sample of Democratic Party supporters, New York senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is first with 26 per cent, followed by Illinois senator Barack Obama with 16 per cent, and former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 10 per cent. Support is lower for former U.S. vice-president Al Gore, Delaware senator Joe Biden, and New Mexico governor Bill Richardson.

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 : Polls & Research, September 11, 2007

PROVIDENCE, R.I., 10 (UPI) -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y, has widened her lead slightly among Democratic voters in Rhode Island, a new poll indicates.

The latest poll from Brown University, taken from a statewide sample of voters, also shows Rhode Island Gov. Donald L. Carcieri's job approval numbers have dropped 15 percent since the last poll, The Providence Journal reported Monday. About 44 percent of those surveyed said they feel he is doing a good job, compared to 59 percent in January.

The poll contained a total of 571 registered Rhode Island voters and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

It also found that if the Democratic primary was held now, 35 percent of the 380 voters would vote for Clinton, which is 2 percentage points higher than in January.

Another 16 percent said they would vote for Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill, while 7 percent would vote for former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards and 3 percent for Delaware Sen. Joe Biden.

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, Connecticut Sen. Christopher Dodd and Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich all received less than 3 percent of the vote, while Mike Gravel received no support.



United Press International, September 10, 2007

Senator Tom Harkin, Democrat of Iowa, has made clear he has no intention of endorsing a 2008 presidential candidate before the nomination. But that does not mean that any of his party's contenders would miss a chance to pay their respects Sunday at his 30th annual steak fry. Never mind the grumbling from candidates that a long list of forums and debates has been eating up their schedules this political season. In their eyes, an audience of thousands of Iowa Democrats is too important to pass up.

Six of the eight Democratic candidates will be on hand. Representative Dennis J. Kucinich of Ohio and former Senator Mike Gravel of Alaska were not invited, aides said, because neither has established an active campaign organization in Iowa.

Beyond the steak (grilled, not fried) here are questions to ponder while watching on C-Span.

Will John Edwards steal the show, considering he carried Warren County, the site of the event, in 2004? Or will Senator Barack Obama repeat the strong performance of his debut last year?

Or will it be Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's day? Mrs. Clinton does, after all, have an important endorsement of her own: Ruth Harkin, the senator's wife.

By Jeff Zeleny, The New York Times, September 10, 2007

(CBS) Rudy Giuliani, after holding the front-runner spot in the race for the Republican presidential nomination for months, has seen his lead nearly evaporate with the entry of former senator and TV star Fred Thompson into the race, a new CBS News/New York Times poll finds.
The poll contains other foreboding signs for the former New York City mayor as well, including indications that Republican primary voters may not buy his argument that running America's biggest city makes Giuliani fit to occupy the White House.

After seeing his support among Republican primary voters rise to 38 percent in August, Giuliani was backed by only 27 percent of respondents in the most recent survey, narrowing his lead over Thompson to 5 percentage points after holding a 20-point edge last month.

While Thompson, at 22 percent support, is now a close second to Giuliani, he was not the only Republican to seemingly benefit from Giuliani's fading numbers. Arizona Sen. John McCain, who was written off by some after months of staff upheaval and disappointing fundraising, saw his support increase 6 points since the last survey to 18 percent. On the other hand, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who won August's straw poll in Ames, Iowa, saw little benefit nationwide, scoring 14 percent support - largely unchanged since last month.

Shallow Support?

Giuliani has based much of his presidential campaign around his actions as New York mayor during and immediately after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Strategically, this makes sense: 25 percent of GOP primary voters cite 9/11 as the reason they back Giuliani, and 82 percent of them believe Giuliani is a strong leader.

But beyond his record on 9/11 and his leadership abilities, Giuliani may face several problems. In recent Republican presidential debates, Giuliani has made the point that none of the top Democrats in the race - Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or John Edwards - has run a state, city or business. Yet only 48 percent of registered voters believe that being a big-city mayor qualifies one to be president, a sentiment shared equally by Democrats and Republicans.

On the other hand, registered voters overwhelmingly believe that being a senator or governor provides the experience necessary to be president. Romney has been a governor, while all the other top candidates in the race are serving or have served in the Senate.

Also troubling for Giuliani may be how knowledgeable his own supporters are of his tenure as mayor, aside from 9/11. A majority of Giuliani supporters were unable to say whether crime went up or down during his administration, despite his frequent mentions of making New York safer. And more than 70 percent of Giuliani supporters didn't know whether race relations got better or worse under Giuliani - several well-publicized incidents involving New York police are credited with exacerbating racial tensions in the city while Giuliani was mayor.

There even appears to be some ignorance among Giuliani's supporters on the issue that most separates him from the rest of the GOP field: his support for abortion rights. While 41 percent say Giuliani favors legal abortions, 31 percent believe, incorrectly, that he opposes them.

However, even if more Republicans become aware of his position on abortion, Giuliani may still win the nomination. By a 2-to-1 margin, Republican primary voters said they could vote for a less conservative candidate if they believed that candidate would win in a general election, where Giuliani's moderate views on social issues could allow him to win support from independent voters.

Giuliani may also see his lead stabilize or even grow if Thompson stumbles out of the gate. More than two-thirds of Republican primary voters have yet to decide if they view the "Law & Order" star favorably or unfavorably, while 40 percent view Giuliani favorably - the highest percentage among the top Republican candidates.

The Democrats

While the Republican race has been tumultuous, the Democratic contest has been relatively static for the past month. Clinton remains firmly in the lead among Democratic primary voters, with 44 percent support, trailed by Obama at 26 percent and Edwards at 17 percent - all largely unchanged since August.

Clinton also meets expectations by leading Obama by more than two to one among women. But they are nearly even among male Democratic voters.



CBS News, September 10, 2007

CORAL GABLES, Florida (CNN) -- Questions about immigration dominated a forum for Democratic presidential candidates put on Sunday by the Spanish-language television network Univision.

Front-runner Sen. Hillary Clinton condemned what she called "very destructive" rhetoric on the issue.

Other Democrats blasted Republicans for demanding to clamp down on the U.S.-Mexico border. The candidates also took implicit jabs at GOP contenders who refused to sign up for a similar Spanish-language forum.

"There are many in the political world and, frankly, in the broadcast world today that take a particular aim at the Latino population," Clinton said. "I think it is very destructive. It undermines our unity as a country."

She cited an immigration bill the House of Representatives passed in 2006 as a "particularly egregious example." She said the bill, which would have punished people who aid illegal immigrants, "would have criminalized the Good Samaritan. It would have criminalized Jesus Christ."

Univision offered a similar platform for Republicans, but it was shelved after only one of the nine GOP contenders -- Sen. John McCain of Arizona -- agreed to appear. Among the Republican field, McCain has been a lonely defender of the White House-backed immigration bill that foundered in the Senate earlier this year. That bill would have created a path to legal status for the estimated 12 million-plus undocumented workers believed to be in the United States -- a provision many conservatives denounced as "amnesty" for illegal immigrants.

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said construction of a fence along the Mexican border to block illegal immigration was "a terrible example of Washington's misguided policy." "Congress only funded half of the wall," said Richardson, who also served as energy secretary and U.N. ambassador in the Clinton administration. "If you are going to build a 12-foot wall, you know what is going to happen? A lot of 13-foot ladders. This is a terrible symbol of America."

Clinton said she favored tighter border controls, but said the nation needs comprehensive immigration reform. The failed immigration bill also would have created a guest-worker program for immigrants.

Sen. Barack Obama, who has placed a consistent second in national polls, said President Bush missed a chance to defuse the fears of American workers who believe illegal immigrants will take their jobs. "They feel that they are losing jobs. They feel like they are losing health care," the Illinois senator said. "They feel that they are falling behind, and their children won't have a better future. So a president has to speak out forcefully against anti-immigrant sentiment and racist sentiment, but also has to make sure that all workers are being tended to."

Since only two of the candidates -- Richardson and Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd -- speak Spanish, an interpreter relayed questions from the network and translated the answers for the audience. The debate was held in South Florida, home to an extensive -- and heavily Republican -- Cuban immigrant population. Dodd said he would begin lifting the decades-old trade embargo on the communist government of Cuban leader Fidel Castro, saying Castro is "using that as an excuse for his own failures." He said Cuba was already looking past the ailing Castro, who temporarily ceded power to his brother, Raul, last year. "We need to understand it and be part of the transition in that country, to make a difference as it is occurring," Dodd said.

Clinton said Castro has gained allies in Latin America, such as Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, under the Bush administration "because of the misguided, bullying policies of this president." She said she would work toward democratic change in Cuba.

Delaware Sen. Joe Biden was the only Democrat to miss Sunday's event. Biden, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, will hold a Tuesday hearing on the Bush administration's highly anticipated report on the progress of the war in Iraq. Former Sen. John Edwards, the party's 2004 vice presidential nominee, said he was concerned the report -- presented by Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and Ambassador Ryan Crocker -- would be "a sales job by the White House." Edwards, of North Carolina, said that if Iraqi leaders don't reach a political solution to the four-year-old war, Congress should set a timetable for American troops to leave. "And if the president vetoes a bill that has a timetable for withdrawal, the Congress should send him another bill with a timetable for withdrawal until the troops come home," he said.

Nothing in the Bush administration's report will change the fact that there is no military solution to the problems in Iraq, Clinton said. "I believe we should start bringing our troops home," she said.

But Richardson challenged her and other candidates by saying that he would leave no residual force behind in Iraq. "I would bring them all home, every one of them," within six to eight months, Richardson said.

CNN, September 10, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Two Democratic United States presidential hopefuls could defeat their Republican rivals in Ohio, according to a poll by the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. At least 46 per cent of respondents in the Buckeye State would back New York senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in the 2008 election.

Rodham Clinton leads former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani by seven points, Arizona senator John McCain by five points and actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson by 12 points.

In other head-to-head match-ups, former North Carolina senator John Edwards holds a nine-point advantage over Giuliani, an eight-point lead over McCain, and an 18-point lead over Thompson. Democratic Illinois senator Barack Obama leads Giuliani by one point, trails McCain by one point, and leads Thompson by 12 points.

In 2004, Republican George W. Bush carried Ohio's 20 electoral votes, with 51 per cent of the vote. The Buckeye State has supported the eventual president in every U.S. election since 1964.

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

McCain, who bottomed out in a USA TODAY poll in mid-August after financial woes and a staff shake-up, has rebounded by 4 percentage points, to 15%. Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney has slipped 4 points from August, to 10%. At 34%, former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani leads the field, as he has all year.

The poll, taken Friday and Saturday, shows Republican voters a bit more satisfied with their choice of candidates than they were in April, while Democratic voters are a bit less satisfied. The Democratic edge on that measure of enthusiasm is now negligible.

Thompson continues to be a wild card in the GOP contest. He ranks second at 22%, up 3 points since August and his strongest showing since his name was added to the list of contenders in March. Campaign spokesman Todd Harris says Thompson's support is "already trending the right way" after formally announcing his campaign Thursday. Thompson is significantly less well known than Giuliani or McCain - 28% of Republicans say they've never heard of Thompson, compared with 8% for Giuliani and 9% for McCain.

Among those Republicans who know all four leading contenders, Giuliani and Thompson are essentially tied. In a head-to-head race among all GOP voters, Giuliani bests Thompson by 13 points, 53%-40%.

On the Democratic side, New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton continues to lead the field, at 45%, over Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, at 24%. Former North Carolina senator John Edwards is third at 16%, up 3 points since August.

In a head-to-head race, Democrats favor Clinton over Obama by 31 points, 63%-32%, the biggest margin to date.

However, Democrats are somewhat less satisfied than they were last spring about their selection of candidates. Now, 73% say they're "pleased," compared with 80% in April; 23% "wish someone else would get into the race," compared with 18% then.

Republican voters are somewhat more satisfied than they were before: 70% say they're pleased with the choice; 26% would like a new candidate. In April, a third wanted additional choices.

The samples of 425 Republicans and Republican-leaning independents and 500 Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents have margins of error of +/- 5 percentage points.

By Susan Page, USA Today, September 9, 2007

As part of an effort to woo the nation's rapidly growing Hispanic population, all but one of the Democratic presidential candidates converge at a first-of-its-kind debate at the University of Miami Sunday. The 90-minute forum will be televised nationally in prime time on Univision, the most watched Spanish-language television network in the United States. "For the first time in U.S. history, a debate will focus exclusively on Latino issues," said Simon Rosenberg, president of the centrist New Democratic Network, a political advocacy organization.

All of the Democratic presidential candidates agreed to the debate. However Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., pulled out on Friday. A similar Hispanic debate for the Republican presidential candidates scheduled for Sept. 16 was canceled because Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., was the only candidate who said he could attend. McCain supported the failed immigration reform effort in the Senate.

Hispanic Voters a 'Battleground Community'

Latinos are the nation's largest minority group, representing nearly half the total population growth between 2002 and 2006, according to the Pew Hispanic Center. Hispanics will represent about 10 percent of the U.S. electorate in 2008. In a close contest, analysts say Hispanics could make the difference in who finishes first -- providing they come out to vote.

Political strategists say the debate is a key part of a tactical strategy to win the support of Latino voters in key battleground states such as Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona and Florida, where the Hispanic population is rising. "This is a battleground community of huge consequence that could decide the next president of the United States," Rosenberg said.

Democratic Candidates Court Latino Voters

With immigration reform emerging as a top issue in 2008, Democratic candidates are vying to attract Latinos like never before. The Democratic National Committee has scheduled the party's convention in Denver; Colorado is a state with a growing Hispanic population. Many of the candidates have Spanish-language sections on their campaign Web sites, including Richardson, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, and Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., who also speaks Spanish fluently.

Richardson Struggles for Name Recognition

Despite having a mother who is Mexican, being fully bilingual and being raised in Mexico City, most Hispanics don't know who Richardson is. Six in 10 Latinos say they have never heard of the governor, according to a June USA Today/Gallup study. "With a name like Bill Richardson, it's a bit of a challenge," said Tom Reynolds, Richardson's national press secretary. "His name is not a traditional Hispanic name so the Latino community doesn't readily make that connection." he said. The Richardson campaign recently launched "Mi Familia" -- a grassroots fundraising and support-building effort directed toward Hispanics in Arizona, Nevada and California. "Latinos won't vote for us just because the governor is Latino," Reynolds said. "He is equally concerned as they are about health care, Iraq, education and energy, so our message is just as important as our shared heritage."

Clinton Has Early Poll Lead Among Democratic Latino Voters

Clinton may have an edge with the Hispanic community. Her huband garnered 72 percent of support of Latino voters in 1996, according to exit polls.

She has also highlighted her close relationships with prominent Hispanics, including her campaign manager, Patricia Solis Doyle, the first Latino woman to lead a presidential campaign, Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., and Dolores Huerta, a longtime activist who helped Cesar Chavez organize farmworkers. She has hired a Hispanic pollster and a director of Hispanic outreach, and has some high-profile endorsements, including Fabian Nunez, speaker of the California House, and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. "The relationship that she started with the Latino community didn't start yesterday," said Fabiola Rodriguez-Ciampoli, director of Hispanic outreach for the Clinton campaign.

A June USA Today/Gallup Poll found that Hispanics, by nearly 3 to 1, say they're Democrats or lean that way. Of those, 59 percent said they support Clinton, while only 13 percent said they support Obama. That support could translate into a huge political asset in early contests in Florida, California, Nevada and other states with large Hispanic populations.

"People know she has a strong record of supporting issues important to our community like heath care, education, Iraq and immigration," Rodriguez-Ciampoli said.

Clinton and Obama spoke before roughly 2,000 Hispanic educators, activists, and community and business leaders at the annual conference of the nation's largest Hispanic civil rights organization, the National Council of La Raza, in Miami Beach in July.

Republicans Made Inroads With Latino Voters in 2000 and 2004

The vast majority of Latino voters usually vote Democratic. However the GOP made significant gains in attracting Hispanic voters in the 2000 and 2004 elections. President Bush drew Latino voters to the GOP like no Republican before him. His campaign outspent former Vice President Al Gore in 2000 the crucial state of Florida, where a majority of Cuban-Americans reside. In 2004, Bush won 40 percent of the Latino vote, doubling the number of Hispanics who had supported Republican Bob Dole eight years earlier.

But the inroads Bush made are vanishing and may be gone by the time November 2008 rolls around.

By Jennifer Parker, ABC News, September 7, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - More Democratic Party supporters in the United States want Hillary Rodham Clinton as their presidential nominee next year, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. 43 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in a 2008 primary, up three points since late August.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 24 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 12 per cent, New Mexico governor Bill Richardson with four per cent, Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich with three per cent, and Delaware senator Joe Biden also with three per cent.

Yesterday, Kucinich met with Syrian president Bashar Assad, and declared: "What most people are not aware of is that Syria has taken in more than 1.5 million Iraqi refugees. The Syrian government has actually shown a lot of compassion in keeping its doors open, and being a host for so many refugees." Kucinich said he would not visit Iraq, adding, "I don't want to bless that occupation with my presence."

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, September 7, 2007

Fred Thompson, who is officially launching his presidential bid today, leads in a new poll in South Carolina. Thompson, the well-known actor and former Tennessee senator, received the support of 19 percent of Republicans surveyed in the Clemson University Palmetto Poll. Rudy Giuliani, the national front-runner in most polls, was second with 18 percent, and John McCain was third with 15 percent. Mitt Romney was fourth with 11 percent, but the August poll suggested he could grow his support -- he is much better known than a similar poll in October 2006 and is seen far more favorably as well.

Twenty percent of Republicans said they were still undecided. The South Carolina GOP primary has gained some prominence since party officials moved it up in the election calendar to Jan. 19.

Among S.C. Democrats, who are scheduled to go to the polls on Jan. 29, Hillary Clinton has a healthy lead over Barack Obama, 26 percent to 16 percent. Among African-American voters, who typically make up half the turnout, she leads 28 percent to 23 percent, according to the poll.

John Edwards, the former senator from neighboring North Carolina who won the South Carolina primary in 2004, was third with 10 percent. Of Democrats surveyed, 35 percent said they were undecided.

By Foon Rhee, The Boston Globe, September 6, 2007

The presidential race is speeding up. But the outlook remains unchanged

THE era when Labour Day marked the official kick-off of the primary season has long gone. The candidates have been hard at it for months. The public has already endured 12 televised debates, and the press has long devoted more attention to the presidential campaign than to anything other than Iraq. But Labour Day has its uses nonetheless. It provides an excuse for the candidates to redouble their efforts. This week they love-bombed Iowa and New Hampshire with renewed intensity, with Bill Richardson even declaring that Iowa's first-in-the-nation position was ordained by the Lord. For the press, it provides an excuse for meditating on the state of the race. So here goes.

The most striking thing about the race is how stable it is. For all the blizzard of daily events, the "fundamentals" have stayed fixed for a year. The Democrats, and especially the Clintonians, are in the ascendant-and the Republicans are flailing about like people trapped in quicksand.

Almost every day brings more gloom for them. In the past week or so alone John Warner, a five-term Republican senator, announced that he will not run for re-election (giving the Democrats a chance to pick up a seat in Virginia) and Larry Craig, who once called Bill Clinton a "nasty, bad, naughty boy", may have to resign his Idaho Senate seat in the wake of a bizarre incident in an airport lavatory. All but one of the dozen or so elected officials who are currently in legal trouble are Republicans.

All this is obviously good news for the Democratic candidates. It also raises the possibility that a Democratic president could face a Democratic Congress. Some Democrats, delirious over the Craig affair, are even talking about winning a filibuster-proof majority (60 seats out of 100) in the Senate for the first time since Jimmy Carter's presidency.

The Democratic pecking order is also remarkably stable. Hillary Clinton has enjoyed a double-digit lead over her nearest rival for months. The latest Pew poll suggests that, if anything, that lead is widening, with 40% of Democrats and Democrat-leaners favouring Mrs Clinton compared with 21% who favour Barack Obama. But most Democrats would be thrilled to have either of the front-runners as their nominee.

The Republican pecking order, by contrast, is up in the air, with Republican stalwarts still seeking a champion and the Republican candidates flummoxed by "the Bush problem": reluctant to break with the president's policies but conscious that those policies are deeply unpopular in the country. John McCain flamed out early, primarily because of his support for immigration reform. The Republicans now have not one front-runner but two. Mitt Romney leads the field in both Iowa and New Hampshire-but is finding it hard to project his appeal nationally. Rudy Giuliani leads in every national poll-but confronts the problem that it is almost impossible to win nationally if you flounder in the early primaries.

Two other candidates have a chance of shaking up the Republican field. The best known is Fred Thompson, who announced his candidacy on September 5th. The most interesting is Mike Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas and legendary fat boy made slim. Mr Huckabee has become the Bill Clinton of this campaign season (he even hails from Mr Clinton's home town of Hope). He is proving to be a talented flesh-presser and off-the-cuff speaker. He even extends a wide stride over America's cultural divide, as a Baptist minister (and Darwin-basher) who also plays a mean bass guitar. Still, it seems unlikely that either Mr Thompson or Mr Huckabee possesses the necessary heft to pull their party out of the slough of despond.

It is always prudent to enter the usual "a week is a long time in politics" caveats. Another terrorist incident could revive the Republicans' fortunes. A Bill-related sex scandal could deflate the Clinton dirigible. Fifty-two per cent of Americans have already formed negative impressions of the campaign; 59% have not bothered to watch a single debate. Moreover, political campaigns are more vulnerable than ever to gaffes thanks to YouTube and the blogosphere.

Sixty-one weeks to go

Mrs Clinton may be making a mistake in tying herself so closely to her husband (the two were hip-and-thigh in Iowa and New Hampshire this week, before separating to go on a talk-show blitz). Mr Obama is a powerful campaigner and fund-raiser. And John Edwards has a lot of support in the early primary states and with the unions. John Kerry was languishing at 9% in a Gallup poll of Democratic voters in January 2004. By early February he had leapt to 52%.

But so far nothing has even begun to disturb the dynamic of the race, with the Democrats cruising confidently ahead of the Republicans and Mrs Clinton cruising confidently ahead of her Democratic rivals. Today's Republican Party bears a striking resemblance to Britain's Conservatives in the dying days of John Major's administration. The party's hard right did its best to redefine conservatism as the philosophy of mean-spirited lunatics. Every week or so brought news of a Tory MP caught with his trousers down or his hand in the till. (It later turned out that Mr Major had once conducted an adulterous affair with a fellow MP, Edwina Currie.)

Today's Democratic Party cannot claim anything like New Labour's mixture of fresh faces and shiny new ideas. Mr Obama brings the fresh face but some worryingly half-baked thinking: he recently produced a perfect formula for deepening the mortgage crisis by fining over-stretched mortgage companies. Mrs Clinton is singularly bereft of freshness, intellectual or otherwise. But given the Republican Party's travails, the Democratic Party's failure to reinvent itself is unlikely to make much difference on election day. The day after could be a different matter.

The Economist, September 6, 2007

Among Ohio voters, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton has opened a lead in a hypothetical, head-to-head matchup against former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

A new Quinnipiac University poll has Democrat Clinton ahead of Republican Giuliani 47 percent to 40 percent. The same candidates were tied in a similar survey last month.

Clinton also is out in front when paired with either Senator John McCain or another Republican, former Senator Fred Thompson.

And, the poll finds Clinton maintains a strong lead over Senator Barack Obama in the Democratic primary race. She has 44 percent to his 15 percent.

The pollsters questioned more than 1,400 Ohio voters.

Associated Press, September 6, 2007

How the extended campaign season and consolidated primary calendar can help or hurt the candidates.

It' s no longer true that presidential races begin on Labor Day (unless Presidents Day counts as the new Labor Day). But even with this year's unprecedented early maneuvering, the contest still heats up as autumn temperatures cool. The exchanges between candidates sharpen; the advertising wars intensify; voters focus more intently.

"Voters in early states for a while simply process what they are told by the political media," says Democratic strategist Jim Jordan, an advisor to the campaign of Sen. Christopher Dodd. "But by November or December they have seen enough with their own eyes to form their own impressions. And that's when races start to move."

With Labor Day past, and that potential movement ahead, it's a good moment to pinpoint the key questions that could decide each party's nomination. One fundamental difference separates the two races: Democrats have a genuine front-runner -- Sen. Hillary Clinton -- and Republicans don't. That contrast shapes the pivotal issues on each side.

There's no mystery about the most pressing question for Democrats: Can anyone stop Hillary? The answer largely will turn on two other questions.

First: Can change, or ideology or electoral viability trump experience? One pillar of Clinton's strength is that polls show Democratic voters see her as tougher, more experienced and better prepared for the presidency than her principal rivals, Sen. Barack Obama and former Sen. John Edwards.

The two men are trying to overcome that advantage mostly by insisting they represent a more profound change in direction. Obama, attempting a form of jujitsu, argues that his lack of time in Washington makes him more qualified than Clinton to change the capital and unify the country. Edwards maintains he's more committed than Clinton (or Obama) to confronting big business and achieving liberal change. These arguments will resonate with Democrats who find Clinton either too polarizing or too accommodating. Clinton's challengers also will find support from Democrats who doubt she can win a general election or are reluctant to reopen the controversies of the Bill Clinton era.

But the early evidence is that these concerns alone won't topple Hillary Clinton. She remains competitive with the top GOP candidates in general-election polls, blunting the viability argument. Fatigue with Bill Clinton exists, but most Democrats remember his presidency positively. And she is identifying with the Democratic hunger for change by cleverly arguing that she has the experience to deliver the change her rivals promise. All of that suggests Clinton's challengers probably can't catch her without burnishing their own credentials on strength and preparation -- and tarnishing hers.

The other critical question for Democrats is whether anyone can loosen Clinton's hold on working-class voters, especially women. Obama runs well with upscale, well-educated voters -- but Clinton's competitive there and dominant among Democrats without college degrees. And in most states, the downscale Democrats who now favor Clinton outnumber the upscale voters most disposed toward Obama.

For Republicans, the immediate question is whether former Sen. Fred Thompson, who is due to join the race Thursday, can gain traction. Even some Thompson supporters worry he has hesitated too long, squandering the early excitement about his candidacy. Thompson's performance may decide another pivotal GOP question: Can anyone unite social conservatives? The party's largest voting bloc still isn't entirely sold on any of the candidates. If social conservatives remain divided, especially in the showdown state of South Carolina (scheduled to vote on Jan. 19), that will help Rudolph Giuliani, the most socially moderate contender. One indicator to watch: Can the heavyweight fraternity of social conservatives (such as Focus on the Family's James Dobson) privately auditioning the candidates agree on an endorsement this fall?

Another question looming over both sides is the effect of the ever-accelerating primary calendar. As more states schedule January primaries, Iowa and New Hampshire appear likely to vote no later than Jan. 8. That widens the space between those first contests and the 20-state avalanche of primaries on Feb. 5, potentially altering the race's dynamic.

Giuliani has bet heavily on the Feb. 5 states and Florida one week earlier. But that now may be too long to wait for a breakthrough. The traditional path to the GOP nomination has been to win either Iowa or New Hampshire and then South Carolina; if one candidate manages that feat in 2008, the race could effectively end before Feb. 5. "The nomination could be won in January," insists Tom Rath, a New Hampshire strategist advising Mitt Romney. Romney, in fact, appears best positioned for such an early sweep, which the other Republicans may increasingly focus on preventing.

The new calendar creates opportunities and risks for Clinton. If she stumbles early (especially in New Hampshire), it could allow a rival to build momentum before the Feb. 5 showdown. But if she takes Iowa and New Hampshire -- and she's likely to win the second if she does the first -- she could end the race right then. It's only September, but the clock is ticking for the Democrats chasing Clinton.



By Ronald Brownstein, Los Angeles Times, September 5, 2007

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- What if you gave a primary and nobody came? That could happen in Florida and Michigan.

Florida has jumped the gun and scheduled its presidential primary for January 29 -- before the primary season officially opens on February 5. Michigan's governor on Tuesday signed legislation setting its primary date on January 15.

But six major Democratic candidates have signed a pledge not to campaign in those states unless they comply with party rules. Wait a minute. Democrats are saying they're not going to campaign in Michigan, the homeland of organized labor? And Florida, where Al Gore was just a few chads short of becoming president?

What does that mean? It means that, for all the talk about challenging the supremacy of the early voting states like Iowa and New Hampshire, those states are still as important as ever. Maybe more important, as they provide crucial momentum for what is, in effect, a national primary on February 5.

Want evidence? Look at where the candidates spent Labor Day.

Democrats Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Joe Biden and Bill Richardson and Republican John McCain campaigned in Iowa.

Democrats Clinton, Barack Obama and Chris Dodd and Republican Mitt Romney campaigned in New Hampshire. Republican Sam Brownback was in South Carolina.

Anybody in Florida or Michigan? Nope.

The Democratic Party rules committee voted not to seat delegates from Florida and Michigan at the convention if they don't change their date. The Republican Party also says those states will be penalized delegates.

Will the candidates dare to ignore vote-rich states like Florida and Michigan? Yes. Why?

First, it costs a lot of money to campaign in those big states. Candidates who have raised less money can't afford them. Edwards says that "the contest for the nomination for the presidency should be based on substance, real ideas and who should actually change the country, who has the personal characteristics to be president, not a fundraising contest.''

Even candidates like Clinton and Obama who have the money to campaign in Florida and Michigan signed the pledge. These candidates know they dare not insult voters in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Obama and Edwards are hoping to score a breakthrough in Iowa, where the top three Democrats are virtually tied. If that happens, Clinton will have to rely on New Hampshire to make her the Comeback Kid.

Everyone agrees the primary system needs fixing. But they also agree on something else. "We need to fix it, and we need to preserve the Iowa caucuses,'' says McCain.

Don't mess with Iowa and New Hampshire. They still call the shots. The whole idea of letting Iowa and New Hampshire go first is that they are small. They require face-to-face campaigning. To run in Florida and Michigan, you have to spend a lot of money on TV ads. But those poor voters may not see as many ads as they had hoped.

By Bill Schneider, CNN, September 4, 2007

WASHINGTON - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton promised retirees that if elected president she will not cut Social Security benefits, raise the retirement age or privatize the taxpayer-funded system.

The New York senator told the AARP's legislative conference that she would bring a "renewed national commitment to Social Security" to the White House.

"This is the most successful domestic program in the history of the United States," Clinton said to applause from seniors gathered in Washington to push their policy agenda. "When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything."

She also said she does not support cutting benefits or increasing the retirement age. Seniors can begin collecting partial benefits at age 62, with full benefits available at age 67 for those born in 1960 or later. Clinton said instead she will protect the program through fiscal responsibility and criticized President Bush's leadership on the issue.

Bush sought to change the program to create personal savings accounts while trimming future benefits for workers younger than 55. Democrats rallied in opposition, and Republicans shrank from the political challenge of remaking a program that provides benefits to millions of elderly voters.

By Nedra Pickler, Associated Press, September 4, 2007

MANCHESTER, N.H., Sept. 3 - Forget the "lesser-of-the-evils" talk typically heard from Democratic primary voters around this time of a presidential campaign. Interviews with dozens of Democrats here and across the country this Labor Day weekend found them enthusiastic about their presidential choices and, if slightly nervous about potential weaknesses in their candidates, confident of victory in 2008.

"I think Hillary is pretty strong," said Lesley Cain, a dentist, as she sat out in the afternoon sun on Market Square in Portsmouth, N.H., waiting for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and former President Bill Clinton to arrive for a Labor Day rally. "But I think Obama is good, too. It's a flip at this point."

Carol Brackett, 51, a retired dental technician from Portland, Me., said: "I love the field of Democrats. This is going to be hard."

These expressions of satisfaction from members of a party better known for quadrennial rites of grumbling do not mean that primary voters do not have some qualms about their leading candidates after months of getting to know them. Especially in the early voting states, like New Hampshire and Iowa, but also in other parts of the country where voters were asked over the last few days about their impressions as the campaign barrels toward the first primaries early next year, Democratic voters said that they were pleased to be able to select among Mrs. Clinton, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina and the rest of the party's candidates, but that they also continued to have questions about them.

Again and again, voters - often unprompted - said they were concerned that Mr. Obama did not have enough experience.

"Not this year - he's not ready," said Karen Smith, 63, who works for a medical technologies firm in Portsmouth, and who said she was leaning toward Mrs. Clinton. "But he'll be back."

Some expressed concern that Mrs. Clinton, as a general-election candidate, would be hurt by voter animosity that has accumulated over the years. "Hillary has the baggage from the Bill years, and all the various scandals they have been through," said Ken Purington, 50, of Rollinsford, N.H.

And Mr. Edwards, who campaigned across New Hampshire last week, was rarely named by voters when they were asked who they were considering, suggesting the difficulty he continues to face in his second bid for the presidency against two better-known candidates running for the first time. "He is too much of the same old thing: it is time for something different," Emily Vance, a 22-year-old writer, said in a break from reading the newspapers at a gallery in Jacksonville, Fla.

Still, this is a confident party this fall. In one sign of this, voters said they believed either Mrs. Clinton or Mr. Obama could win the presidency back from the Republicans.

"I think she could be a good president and she could win," said Sharon Black, an undecided Democrat from Des Moines, who turned out to hear Mrs. Clinton speak at a labor rally at the Iowa State Fairgrounds on Monday. "She could be a really strong, passionate Democratic candidate, and that's a person who could win in 2008."

The responses suggest a marked shift in mood for Democrats over the past year. There was no talk this weekend of Al Gore, the former vice president, or any other Democrat, coming to the rescue of the party. The findings were also another indication that Democratic voters appear as energized about this election as Republican voters are subdued, though that could change once the Republicans rally around a candidate and if Mrs. Clinton is nominated and turns out to be as polarizing a candidate as Republicans are hoping.

Although several Democrats said they were concerned that the presence of Mr. Clinton during the campaign could prove a negative for Mrs. Clinton in a general election, he was often the reason cited by Democrats who said they thought Mrs. Clinton would be a strong president during a difficult time. "Her husband was a very good diplomat for the United States, and he is well respected," said Jan Archambault, 49, a psychiatric nurse from Rollinsford, N.H. "So it's getting two for the price of one."

The interviews suggest that Mrs. Clinton has made progress in her effort to present herself as the most qualified of the candidates. "Of all the fish swimming around in that pond, I think she has the most gray matter between the ears," said Mark Schwartz, 53, of Hampton, N.H., who builds resource recovery plants.

Ron Mirsky, a hair stylist from Exeter, N.H., who said he voted for Mr. Edwards in 2004, said he was likely to support Mrs. Clinton now because of the threat of terrorism and the war in Iraq. "Our country is in a real tough time right now, and she's the one that can pull it together, because she has the experience," Mr. Mirsky said. "She'll make the most balanced decisions."

Some voters expressed concern that that might cut both ways and hurt Mrs. Clinton in a general election. "I hope she's able to win more people over," said Mrs. Brackett, the retired dental technician from Maine. "She's not really warm and fuzzy, so some people are put off by that and threatened by her brilliance."

But Reema Zoumut, an art teacher in Corona, Calif., said: "She went through some trials and tribulations. She, to me, looks good."

Mr. Obama has made a strong and favorable impression on voters, but appears not to have erased the concern - fanned by Mrs. Clinton's campaign with its emphasis on experience - that he might not be ready to be president. A number of voters said they wished Mr. Obama had waited to run and suggested he would be a much stronger candidate in four or eight years.

"I like him a lot - he's very charismatic, he's very positive," said Melinda Fountain of La Porte, Ind. "But he's a one-term senator. How much time has he really had to prove himself?"

In Manchester on Monday, Mr. Obama gave a speech in which he sought to emphasize his outside-of-Washington experience, in what appeared to be a new tactic designed to deal with the concern. Even some of Mr. Obama's supporters who attended the speech said his relatively little time in Washington could prove a detriment in a general election.

"Will he win this time?" asked Chris Mattise, a 56-year-old school counselor from Amherst, N.H. "It's going to be an up-hill struggle."

Democrats expressed some admiration for Mr. Edwards - but offered concern that he had decided to push ahead with a presidential campaign after learning that his wife, Elizabeth, had suffered a recurrence of cancer and that it was not treatable.

"Edwards is a good man," Mr. Schwartz said. "I think he has way too much on his plate to deal with the pressures that are confronting our country now."

Democrats said that ending the war was their top priority, though there was no sign that Mr. Obama and Mr. Edwards were gaining an edge on the issue over Mrs. Clinton by noting that she had originally voted for the authorization allowing the war.

"With more information, you become more informed, you change your position," said Barbara Wilson, an employer trainer from Maine, who said "the war has to stop - the war has to stop now."

By Adam Nagourney, The New York Times, September 4, 2007

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York unveiled a new stump speech on Sunday, outlining the "four big goals" she would have as president and saying she was willing to "work within the system" and make "principled compromises" to achieve them.

Praising the leadership styles of Presidents Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson, Mrs. Clinton described herself as a pragmatist and an alliance-builder. Without naming names, she said her strategies would yield more results than those of her two chief rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois and former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina.

"From my time in the White House and in the Senate, I learned you bring change by working in the system established by the Constitution," Mrs. Clinton said at an early afternoon rally in Concord, drawing a pointed contrast to the outsider messages of Mr. Obama and Mr. Edwards. Referring to the Roosevelts and Johnson, she said, "They got big things done because they knew it wasn't just about the dream, it's about the results."

"I want to work within the system," Mrs. Clinton said. "You can't pretend the system doesn't exist."

Mrs. Clinton, who has won praise from some Republican senators for working with them on legislation, said she would try to follow that approach as president, but without sacrificing important values like preserving Social Security and protecting abortion rights.

"You have to know when to stick to your principles and fight," she said, "and know when to make principled compromises."

Mrs. Clinton's remarks - a sharpened version of the speech she had been delivering for months - drew quick criticism from spokesmen for Mr. Obama and Mr. Edwards. The spokesmen both said that their candidates would curtail the power of lobbyists and take other steps to change the system in Washington more than Mrs. Clinton would.

Mrs. Clinton spoke on the first day of a two-day kickoff for her fall push, which her camp is calling "The Change We Need," a parry to Mr. Obama's effort to position himself as the candidate of change. The stage at Mrs. Clinton's rallies, in Concord and here in Portsmouth, included the words "Change + Experience" - an example of the Clinton camp's argument that she is the most experienced candidate and would still represent change, as a woman and an ideological opposite of President Bush.

"Some people think you should have to choose between change and experience," Mrs. Clinton said in Concord. "Well, with me, you don't have to choose. I have spent my entire life fighting for change." Later, in Portsmouth, Mrs. Clinton added: "Change is just a word without the strength and experience to make it happen."

In laying out her four goals, Mrs. Clinton did not announce any major new policy initiatives, though she did say she would unveil her universal health insurance plan in two weeks.

The four goals were largely thematic: "restore America's standing in the world," "rebuild America's middle class and the economy to support it," "reform our government" and "reclaim the future for our children."

On the last goal, Mrs. Clinton turned more personal, saying she wanted her presidency to be a means of helping parents raise their children. "I want to be able to say to you as your president, 'Our children are well,' " she said.

By Patrick Healy, The New York Times, September 3, 2007

Early primaries make all-out efforts crucial

It is Labor Day, the unofficial kickoff of the New Hampshire presidential primary, and candidates are flooding the Granite State. Batten down the hatches. The Romneys and the Clintons, the Richardsons and the McCains and a half dozen other candidates are on their way. Concord, Salem, Somersworth, Nashua, Manchester, Portsmouth, Milford, Derry, Dover. Before the week is over, not a corner of the state will be spared.

But wait a minute. It may be Labor Day, yet except for Fred Thompson (who hasn't announced but really, really, really intends to get in really, really, soon), none of the candidates have paid any attention to history. They apparently didn't get the memo about how campaigns are supposed to be conducted. They veered off the usual course of waiting until after Labor Day to get their campaigns into first gear. They were tramping through the snow last winter with full-blown campaigns usually not seen until the final weeks before the primary.

What exactly did the candidates accomplish for their troubles?

Truth is, the Democrats could have saved their money and their time. Despite months of intensive campaigning, hiring truckloads of staff and spending oodles of money, the Democratic race stands pretty much where it did last winter.

As 2006 turned into 2007, polling in New Hampshire showed Hillary Clinton in the lead, Barack Obama second and John Edwards third. Sound familiar?

Clinton's lead has varied along the way, from small to large. Edwards's third-place showing has had its own pendulum swings, from a high of 21 percent to, most recently, a low of 10 percent. Obama's numbers have held steady, almost invariably within a few points of 25 percent. The only interesting story on the Democratic side has been the rise of Bill Richardson, from being an asterisk in the polls to as high as 11 percent, occasionally even challenging Edwards for the third-place spot.

The Republican race is a whole other kettle of fish. John McCain must wish that the race today looked like it did last New Year's Eve. Back then, he led almost every poll of New Hampshire voters, sometimes with as much as 30 percent of the vote. Rudy Giuliani was close behind, usually in the mid- to high-20s, and Mitt Romney was often a distant third with 10 percent to 12 percent of the vote. By spring, the dynamics of race had begun to change. McCain crashed and burned more than once, and Romney slowly and steadily used television ads and his own fundraising prowess to creep up the leader board, topping 30 percent today, according to recent polls.

What unites the candidates is that the status of their campaigns today is not accidental or due to luck or the whims of political fate, but almost entirely the result of the strategic decisions, actions and performance of the campaigns themselves.

Clinton's campaign has been steady and solid, with nary a misstep. Obama has exceeded expectations with his strong organization and fundraising. Richardson earned his way up through clever advertising and a consistent theme about his experience. Romney's relentless fundraising and early spending on television made him a force to be reckoned with.

McCain's spiral down was also of his own making. He allowed his campaign to make just about every mistake in the book and chose to associate himself strongly with issues and positions sure to cost him support. Edwards lost his footing when a simple mistake of including the cost of an expensive haircut in a campaign report turned into metaphor that he couldn't easily shake.

The lesser-known candidates on both sides, many of whom are quality candidates, were not able to figure out how to use the past eight months to break through, either with more impressive fundraising totals, consistently superior debate performances, more persuasive televisions ads or more effective political organizations.

Suggesting there are lessons to be learned from the last eight months might be foolhardy. But as the campaign season enters this final stretch, rather than waiting for some magical dynamic to come along and propel their candidacies to victory, candidates would be wise to assume their fates are in their own hands.

By Sue Casey, Concord Monitor, September 3, 2007

Whether selecting a financial investment or betting on an athletic team, fundamentals are more important than snapshot performances or big stars. That's true in politics, too.

American Republicans are in bad shape beyond next year's election for basic reasons, aside from the war in Iraq or the unpopularity of the incumbent; almost every important indicator is negative for them.

Among key constituencies, the most worrisome are young voters, the fastest-growing slice of the U.S. electorate and one where lifetime habits are ingrained early. These voters -- 18 to 29 year olds -- are deserting the Republicans.

"If current trends continue, Republicans are in desperate shape with these critical young voters,'' says Frank Fahrenkopf, the party's national chairman during Ronald Reagan's presidency.

To be sure, some of the Republican woes are predictable. In the past half-century, four out of five times the party that held the White House for two consecutive terms failed to win a third. And parties don't win elections while waging unpopular wars.

The always important enthusiasm quotient -- crowds, volunteers, polls, fund raising -- is all with the Democrats.

And like an old cartoon character, an omnipresent cloud seems to hang over the Republicans. A Karl Rove and an Alberto Gonzales fade away only to be replaced by sex scandals: Senator Larry Craig of Idaho pleads guilty after being arrested in an undercover sting and Senator David Vitter of Louisiana is linked to a Washington escort service.

Cause for Gloom

Sex scandals have a short shelf life, though. And if the problem were simply an unpopular president and/or war, then an unconventional Republican standard-bearer -- say a Rudy Giuliani or a John McCain -- might overcome other obstacles, and the party could maintain its parity in American politics.

The more basic considerations are cause for gloom. The fastest-growing major ethnic voters in America are Hispanics. Several years ago, there was Republican optimism that the party's promotion of a can-do entrepreneurial spirit and fealty to old- fashioned values were winners with these voters; in the last presidential election, George W. Bush got 40 percent of the Hispanic vote, a significant increase from earlier contests. The ugly fight over immigration, with prominent Republicans leading the bashing, has set back these hopes, perhaps for years. In the midterm elections last November, the Republican Latino vote dropped to 30 percent. "If we get the same type of Hispanic support in the next election cycle that we did in the last, there is no way we could elect a Republican president,'' says Florida Senator Mel Martinez, chairman of the national Republican Party.

Rove's Failed Plan

The problems with young voters are deeper, more profound. Some background: In the 1984 presidential election, those between the ages of 18 and 29 voted for Reagan by a margin of 59 percent to 40 percent. Four years later, a majority supported George H.W. Bush, the current president's father. Rove, the younger President Bush's political mastermind, envisioned that younger voters, attracted by the promise of an "opportunity society,'' would emerge as an important element in a generation of Republican dominance.

That plan has been a dismal failure. By 2004, young voters, a little over one-sixth of the electorate, were the only age cohort that supported Democrat John Kerry, by 54 percent to 45 percent. By the midterm elections last year, these voters backed Democrats by 60 percent to 38 percent. If young voters had simply split in the 2004 presidential race, Bush would have won an electoral landslide rather than a close race. If Kerry had gotten 60 percent of the youth vote, he'd be president today.

Cultural Divide

Surveys suggest multiple causes for this shift. Clearly, opposition to the war in Iraq is one; youth also generally look more to the government for solutions to domestic concerns. The war, however, ultimately will end, and views about the government's role can change, as Reagan's popularity in the 1980s suggests.

More enduring may be a cultural divide or the considerably greater tolerance of young people on social issues. On questions about gays, interracial dating or immigration, surveys by the Pew Research Center and other organizations show young people are far more liberal and tolerant than older voters.

Many Republicans reflect intolerance on these matters, and the face of the party is a bunch of middle-aged white guys, an image antithetical to young Americans. "This is the most diverse, multicultural generation ever; they embrace diversity, they think differences are cool,'' says Hans Riemer, national youth director for Democrat Barack Obama. Republicans, he argues, are paying a huge price for visible hostility on some of these matters: "Young voters are turned off by anyone who is repulsed by differences.''

Ties That Bind

This is of more than passing concern.

Although young people still vote in fewer numbers, that's starting to change; the biggest increase in voting in 2004 from the previous election was among the young. Moreover, academic studies consistently show that once Americans vote for a specific party in multiple elections it starts to become a habit. "Persons that identify with one of the parties typically have held the same partisan tie for all or almost all of their adult lives,'' concludes the classic work, "The American Voter.''

The young Republicans that Reagan hooked in the 1980s formed the base of much of the party's success in subsequent elections. Fahrenkopf remembers visiting Reagan in the Oval Office two decades ago to bring him "good news and bad news.'' The good news, the party chairman explained, was that Republicans were doing decidedly better than Democrats among young people for the first time in a couple of generations.

"What's the bad news?'' the Gipper asked. "They don't vote,'' the party chairman replied.

They're starting to, and overwhelmingly they are not pulling Republican levers.

By Albert R. Hunt, Bloomberg, September 3, 2007

Candidates May Have Only Five Months Before Unofficial Winner Is Crowned

While many Americans will hit the asphalt, fire up the barbecue and spend the unofficial end of summer relaxing with friends and family, Labor Day serves as a campaign kick-off for presidential candidates.

In just five months, the nominating contests for Democrats and Republicans essentially could be over. This means the campaign likely will heat up this holiday weekend. "The process over the next five months is going to be fast and furious," said Mark Halperin, of Time magazine.

Presidential hopefuls already have logged countless hours in Iowa and New Hampshire and debated several times.

Now, for the presidential candidates, it's show time.

This year, it's more like the final sprint in a marathon.

For Democrats like Barack Obama and John Edwards, now is the time to try to take down Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton.

"She makes no mistakes," said ABC News political analyst Cokie Roberts. "She wins every debate, and the whole impetus in this Democratic field is how to shoot down Hillary."

On the Republican side, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani still leads in national polls, but Mitt Romney may be the one to beat. He's ahead in the key states of Iowa and New Hampshire.
Then there's former Sen. Fred Thompson, R-Tenn., who's set to announce his entry into the race this week. "He's done well as a non-candidate, as a candidate in waiting," said Stu Rothenberg of the Rothenberg Political Report. But now there will be extra scrutiny of him."

Some may wonder if Thompson is getting in too late. But at least one other candidate, Sen. John McCain, whose campaign fell into disarray this summer, may be wishing he could start over. "We're doing so poorly," he joked on "The Tonight Show" recently, "I thought maybe I would announce on this show that I'm running for president of the United States." McCain still is hoping for a last-minute turnaround, and with presidential politics anything can happen.

By Liz Marlantes, ABC News, September 2, 2007

Candidates seek funding; voters crave information

Political junkies, take heart. It's Labor Day, time to start obsessing about the 2008 presidential campaign.

CONCORD, New Hampshire (Reuters) - For John Hoar, who has been voting in U.S. presidential elections longer than Hillary Clinton has been alive, one of the best reasons to elect her president is that she has seen how the job is done first hand.

"I have been following her since she showed up here with her husband in 1992. He did a good job as president and so will she," the 86-year-old Hoar said as he waited to glimpse the New York senator and her husband, former President Bill Clinton.

The Clintons were back on the campaign trail -- she running for the Democratic presidential nomination in the November 2008 election, he drumming up support for her in the early voting state of New Hampshire.

"Yes, I think she can do it," Hoar said smiling and echoing Hillary Clinton leading the campaign rally crowd in refrains of "Yes, we can." on several occasions.

Leading her Democratic rivals by more than 20 points in most national polls, Hillary Clinton, 59, toured the state where her husband's second place finish in the 1992 primary helped pave his way to the White House.

More than 4,500 people showed up in Concord before the Clintons headed off to the state's fair and then to another rally in Portsmouth. "If you are ready for change, I am ready to lead," Clinton told the cheering crowd on the state house lawn, promising to restore America's standing in the world, rebuild the middle class and shatter the glass ceiling by becoming the first woman elected U.S. president.

"We need to see a woman in the White House. It is about time for the country to accept that," said Doris Gagne.

For many of those who turned out to cheer the candidate and her husband, Hillary Clinton's resume and personality alone is enough to win their votes. "She has the best shot to take it all the way," said Patrick Troy, describing her "experience, determination, guts and drive," as key ingredients that will get her elected next November.

But for many, the man standing next to the candidate is an equally big draw, giving Hillary Clinton something extra no other candidate can claim. Dressed in white jeans and an open-necked shirt, Bill Clinton looked tanned and relaxed as he was introduced to the crowd as the "husband of the future president of the United States." He got as much applause as she did. "Hillary has someone in the house who can give her a lot of good advice. Bill Clinton knows what to do," Hoar said.

For decades, Labour Day weekend has been a time for U.S. politicians to kick off campaigns in earnest and for American families to spend time together. This year, the Clintons followed tradition on both fronts.

By Svea Herbst-Bayliss, Reuters, September 2, 2007

CONCORD, N.H. -- Hillary Clinton rolled out a new stump speech Sunday as she kicked off September with a two-day campaign swing through New Hampshire and Iowa.

Accompanied by her husband, former President Bill Clinton, the New York senator sought to undercut her rivals' charge that she represents a risky return to the past by arguing that she alone has the combination of experience and leadership to produce big changes in both foreign and domestic policy.

"I know some people think you have to choose between change and experience," she said. "Well with me you don't have to choose. I have spent my who life fighting for change."

Citing historic legislative victories by former Presidents Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson, Clinton said, "They got big things done because they knew it was not just about the dream, it was about the results and that's what we've got to do again," she said on the grounds of the state capitol building in Concord. "We need to dream big but then we have to figure out how to get those dreams a reality in the lives of Americans."

Playing off the appeals of Barack Obama and John Edwards, she suggested that hope, inspiration and bold blueprints alone will not achieve the goal of changing course. Emphasizing the lessons learned from her nearly seven years in the Senate and her experiences as first lady during her husband's administration.

"Over the past 14 years I've learned that when you want big changes, you need to build a big consensus," she said. She added, "Even a president has to get 60 votes in the senate to pass a law, and that is a painstaking roll-up-your-sleeves process that involves a lot of preparation and just plain perspiration."

Clinton outlined four big goals for her presidency: restoring America's leadership in the world, rebuilding the middle-class and the economy, reforming government and "reclaiming our future for our children."

In his introduction, Bill Clinton said the Bush administration had reversed many of the policies that had produced record economic growth during the 1990s. Hillary Clinton attacked the administration for producing a "yo-yo society: they pull the strings and expect the rest of us to dance to their tune."

By Dan Balz, The Washington Post, September 2, 2007

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - After months of grand rhetoric, endless fundraising and heavy campaigning, the 2008 presidential race kicks into even higher gear this week at the start of a four-month sprint to the first votes.

A crowded pack of Republican candidates gains a new contender, former senator and Hollywood actor Fred Thompson, as a hard-charging Democratic field hunts for ways to bring down the front-runner, Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York.

The Labor Day holiday weekend, the traditional kick-off for U.S. general election races, opens a campaign stage when voters begin to pay more attention to politics and candidates begin to sharpen their message and throw more elbows at rivals. "It's about to get a lot louder, a lot crazier and a lot nastier from all quarters," said Republican consultant Dan Schnur.

The contenders for the November 2008 election enter a September stretch featuring four debates, the resumption of congressional debate on Iraq and a flurry of hearings and reports on the war. The month ends with another crucial deadline for each campaign to report its financial health.

And with Iowa likely to move its kick-off nominating contest to at least early January -- and perhaps even December -- to stay ahead of other states pushing their contests earlier, the intensity will edge higher as the days grow shorter. "Now is the time when the money starts to be spent, staff starts to grow and you see more, more, more activity," said Democratic consultant Jenny Backus.

The Democratic presidential contenders have been mostly running in place since January, with Clinton holding a steady lead in opinion polls over top rivals Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, John Edwards, the 2004 vice presidential nominee, and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson.

The Republican race has seen more shifts, with the fall of Arizona Sen. John McCain and the rise of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney into first place in polls in the early voting states of Iowa and New Hampshire. Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani has maintained a steady lead over the Republican field in national polls despite conservative dissatisfaction with his views on some social issues, like his support for abortion rights.

THOMPSON HOPES TO FILL VOID

The uneasiness about the top Republican contenders among conservatives opened the door for the run by Thompson, who hopes to fill the void on the right. He formally launches his campaign on Thursday. Conservative former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee hopes to move up in the polls after a surprise second at the Iowa straw poll, intensifying the battle for the party's base supporters.

Things can change quickly once voters begin to take a serious look at the race, as Democrat Howard Dean's 2004 collapse proved. Dean went from a heavy favorite to an also-ran in the span of three weeks in Iowa. "Many voters in both parties have not made up their minds, so there is still plenty of opportunity," said Dante Scala, a political analyst at the University of New Hampshire. "The Republican race is particularly fluid. If Thompson plays his cards right and challenges for those conservative votes, it could be anybody's race," he said.

Schnur said the parties have reversed their usual campaign roles as Republicans grapple with Bush's low approval ratings and public unhappiness with the party's leadership.

"Republicans are usually the ones with a nice hierarchy and the Democrats are the ones scrambling for order, but this year it's precisely the reverse," he said.

"Hillary Clinton is as strong an establishment candidate as George Bush ever was, and there are three, four maybe five Republicans who can make a plausible case at having a shot." While Clinton has held a steady national lead among Democrats, she is embroiled in a close three-way battle in Iowa with Edwards and Obama. Obama, a first-term senator who attracted an impressive 258,000 donors in the first six months of the year, has built strong field operations in the early states but still must overcome doubts about his experience, Backus said.

"Hillary is running on toughness and inevitability, and if you're running on the inevitability of winning, you've got to win," she said. "She has put a lot of pressure on herself. She needs to set the standard and win in Iowa."

By John Whitesides, Reuters, September 2, 2007

Sen. Hillary Clinton has to be better than her rivals. The standard is higher for her. The reason for this isn't her high negatives or her standing in the polls. Nor is it that Clinton-haters are numerous and boisterous. It is because she is a woman.

No citizen has ever voted for a woman for a major party's presidential nomination with a reasonable expectation that she might wind up in the White House. The last two women to run, Elizabeth Dole and Carol Moseley Braun, vanished before the New Hampshire primary even occurred. Beginning with our 1952 primary, the first of the modern era, 221 people have received votes for president either as official candidates or as write-ins. Eight were women. Only one of the eight, Margaret Chase Smith, received more than 1,000 votes.

The older you are, the longer you have lived with a man in the White House. The older you are, the more likely you are to vote. These days, fewer people openly say they would never vote for a woman for president, but no doubt some still hold that view.

But because Clinton is a woman, she is also an inspiring candidate. Women young and old vest their hopes in her. Men who have witnessed the rise of women in all walks of society for four decades know it is time to consider a woman for president - if she seems qualified for the job.

Incredibly, despite her celebrity and her long run on the national stage, Clinton has maintained a zone of privacy. She has kept people from knowing the real Hillary. So what people react to, whether negatively or positively, is a public image. They see her as cold and calculating or wonky and competent. They see her as controlling - or in control. Maybe the hardest thing for Clinton to do as a presidential candidate is to persuade voters to see her for what she is. This doesn't mean allowing them to break through her veil so much as giving them access to her temperament, her philosophy, her experience, her preparedness for the White House.

New Hampshire is the perfect stage for this, and Clinton seems to know it. The point of her busy campaign schedule here is not to win the state's 30-odd delegates at the Democratic National Convention, although she will take as many of them as she can get. Her hope is to change minds. Through personal campaigning, she wants to cancel voters' preconceptions and replace them with a picture of a poised, personable, highly informed politician who would make a good president.

Three factors give Clinton a special opportunity to do that in New Hampshire.

One is the state's tradition in presidential politics. This has long been the one place, or one of two places, where voters judge candidates on the basis of a personal connection. In the early going this time around, multiple television debates and huge campaign rallies for deep-pocket candidates like Clinton have changed the dynamics of campaigning. But she, like Sen. Barack Obama, has also sought out smaller venues where she can meet voters face to face.

Clinton seems intent on leaving no hand unshaken and no question unanswered. When she came to the Monitor for an interview last week, one editor went into it expecting her to be cold and came out saying how wrong he had been. That is the response she is seeking. You can't meet 200 million-plus potential voters across the country, but in New Hampshire, retail politics remains essential.

Another positive factor for Clinton is that the stars are aligned for her. New Hampshire was Nixon Country in 1968 when centrists dominated the Republican Party. The state is still centrist politically, but as Clinton's husband proved in 1992, and as the popularity of Govs. Jeanne Shaheen and John Lynch has demonstrated, it is Democrats, with Independent support, who hold the center now.

The third factor is gender. New Hampshire has a long tradition of electing women to public office. In the last quarter century, only 19 states have elected a woman governor. One of them is New Hampshire, where Shaheen easily won the office in the Clinton landslide of 1996 and was twice re-elected. At the State House, women currently serve as both Senate president and House speaker. In 2006, voters sent Carol Shea-Porter to Congress, breaking the exclusive male hold on congressional seats.

New Hampshire's habit of putting women in office does not mean Clinton will avoid closer scrutiny than male candidates because of her gender. This is the presidency, not the corner office at the State House or the speaker's chair. Voters are right to ask whether Clinton is tough enough for the job. But males in both the Democratic and Republican fields bear this burden to a lesser degree than she. To overcome it, Clinton must wear an iron mask while also projecting warmth.

It was just one interview, but at the Monitor, she pulled off this seeming paradox. On foreign policy in particular, she combined a sober analysis of the Iraq war and the terrorist threat with her intention, if elected, to use diplomacy and humanitarian outreach to restore America's image abroad.

It is too early in the campaign to know what bumps and jolts will alter its course or which of Clinton's rivals will grow more formidable.

But from her professional life - one of a small minority of women in her Yale Law School class, the first woman in her law firm - Clinton knows how high she must jump. And from her husband's electoral experience, she knows New Hampshire.

No woman has ever been in a better position to break the highest glass ceiling in the country.

Concord Monitor, September 2, 2007

WASHINGTON - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton has strengthened her standing as the national front-runner four months before the first primary votes, while rivals Barack Obama and John Edwards compete to be the "anti-Hillary."

Clinton's widely praised debate performances and a disciplined campaign effort with few mistakes have solidified the view that she is the candidate to beat. Obama and Edwards have tried to cut her down, raising questions about the former first lady's electability while touting their own credentials as agents of change.

The Democratic race has remained remarkably static, with none of Clinton's rivals able to challenge her lead in national and most state polls. Yet Iowa remains an elusive prize for her.

Bill Richardson's strong resume and a witty TV ad campaign have helped raise his profile in several early states, but his rocky debate performances have slowed his emergence from second-tier status. Senate veterans Joe Biden and Chris Dodd have struggled to break through, though Dodd got a boost from an endorsement by the largest firefighters union.

Florida and Michigan have complicated the nominating calendar by moving their contests to January. New Hampshire and Iowa likely will push up earlier to maintain their influence. The crush of early contests could make it virtually impossible for all but the best-funded candidates - Clinton and Obama - to campaign in the early voting states.

The Democratic Party has said it will strip Florida of its 210 delegates if its primary goes forward Jan. 29. That means candidates would need fewer delegates - 2,104 - to secure the nomination at next year's convention, scheduled for Aug. 25-28 in Denver.

Despite the uncertainty, here's how the early states are shaping up four months before the voting is expected to begin.

IOWA - Tentatively Jan. 14 (45 pledged delegates)

Nowhere is the race tighter than in Iowa, where Edwards' once solid lead has narrowed due to a strong challenge from Clinton, Obama and lately, Richardson. Edwards remains formidable in Iowa, a state he must win to remain a player in the race. Clinton - who early on trailed so badly in Iowa her deputy campaign manager urged her to skip the state - has redoubled her efforts in recent months. She's opened 19 field offices and has made frequent visits to the state. Clinton has organized an "Apple Corps" of 167 Iowa teachers who have pledged to campaign and caucus for her. The campaign also began running its first television ads in Iowa, where Clinton criticized President Bush and vowed to stand up for "invisible" Americans. Obama's campaign has 29 field offices and some of the party's most seasoned field hands. Richardson is running an aggressive campaign here and has been praised for a smart use of TV ads in the state. Biden has also been advertising extensively, hoping for a breakthrough in the state.

NEW HAMPSHIRE - Tentatively Jan. 22 (22 pledged delegates)

No candidate has been able to break Clinton's strong lead in the nation's first primary state, where polls consistently show her with about a third of the Democratic support. She has a superior organization and the backing of many of the state's leading Democrats. But she's also courting grass-roots activists, conducting conference calls with small groups of voters to answer their questions. Obama says he still has to work to get to know state voters. Richardson is emerging as a possible spoiler, rising in the polls to challenge Edwards for third place. Edwards is trying to shore up his position, taking a recent bus tour and holding policy roundtables with campaign surrogates. Dodd's recent endorsement by the firefighters union - the state's largest - could help boost him out of low single digits. All the candidates are targeting independents, who account for almost half the state's voters and who can vote in the Republican or Democratic primaries.

MICHIGAN - Tentatively Jan. 15 (128 pledged delegates)

The legislature voted to move Michigan's primary from Feb. 26 to January 15, even though the DNC is likely to threaten to strip the state of its delegates if it makes the move, as the party did Florida's. If Michigan makes the move, it could find its traditional campaign stops virtual ghost towns as far as Democratic campaigning goes. Edwards, Obama, Dodd, Richardson and Biden have all promised to skip states that break party rules by holding early primaries. Clinton was reviewing the pledge. The decision not to compete in the state if it awards no delegates particularly impacts Edwards, who has counted on his strong ties to organized labor to perform well here.

NEVADA - Jan. 19 (25 pledged delegates)

The unsettled calendar and uncertainty about how much Nevada's caucuses will matter to the nominating process prompted Edwards to pull staff earlier this month and redirect them to Iowa and New Hampshire. Clinton and Obama have said they will compete vigorously in the state despite its new and untested role in presidential politics. The candidates have made several trips to the state, in part because it's a rich source of campaign cash. Richardson, whose home state of New Mexico is near Nevada, has been a frequent visitor.

SOUTH CAROLINA - Jan. 29 (45 pledged delegates)

Black voters are expected to account for more than half the turnout here and are the main focus of Clinton and Obama's efforts. Both campaigns express confidence that they will win the black vote - Obama because he has a chance to be the first black president and Clinton because of the goodwill for her and her husband in the community. In polls, Clinton has a strong advantage. Edwards, born in South Carolina, is hoping for a repeat of his primary win in the state four years ago but he remains stuck in third place. Biden has secured endorsements from several black activists and officials and hopes for a good showing.

FLORIDA - Jan. 29 (185 pledged delegates, 210 overall to be stripped if no agreement is reached)

The DNC voted earlier this month to strip Florida's delegates if it goes through with its Jan. 29 primary. But state Democrats have until the end of September to come up with an alternative. If the DNC moves forward with its sanctions, the candidates who have pledged to skip states that break party rules by holding early primaries would cede Florida to Clinton, who crushes her rivals in most polls here. Clinton has indicated she will campaign in every state with a primary or caucus, and winning a state as large and diverse as Florida could make it a significant symbolic win. Obama has concentrated his time and campaign resources on South Carolina, whose primary takes place the same day. Few other candidates have the resources to compete in Florida's vast and expensive media markets, particularly if the outcome is little more than a beauty contest.

MEGA TUESDAY - Feb. 5 (As many as 25 states and at least 1,370 delegates)

Feb. 5 has turned into a national primary day, with contests coast to coast. While many states eagerly scheduled their primaries and caucuses on this date to play a bigger role in the nominating process, the sheer volume may mean many states will be deluged with campaign commercials but not see any of the candidates in person. It's also unclear how significant these states will be, now that so many others have moved their contests into January.

With 370 pledged delegates, California remains the biggest prize. The state's extensive absentee and vote by mail program means that millions of voters can begin casting ballots as early as Jan. 7. Clinton maintains a wide lead in California polls, and has launched "Hillcorps," an extensive volunteer outreach effort. Clinton is expected to cruise in her home state of New York and neighboring New Jersey. Edwards hopes for a strong showing in Southern states such as Arkansas and his home state of North Carolina. Richardson is counting on strong support in New Mexico and other Western states, including Colorado, Arizona and Wyoming.

By Beth Fouhy and Nedra Pickler, Associated Press, September 1, 2007

WASHINGTON (AP) - By all accounts, Democrats John Edwards and Dennis Kucinich should be racking up union endorsements. They've walked picket lines, denounced trade agreements, bashed corporations and curried favor with unions large and small. In joint appearances with other Democratic candidates, they routinely get the loudest applause from the union rank and file.

If loyalty and reliability were the only qualifications for an endorsement, even union officials say Kucinich and Edwards would get them all. But with unions starting to line up behind candidates four months before the voting, the word that counts most seems to be "electability."

"We are in a situation where we have a lot of friends running for this position," said Edward J. McElroy, president of the American Federation of Teachers, which has not endorsed anyone. "There are people that we've been involved with for years and years in the Senate who we know, and there are others we know that have been involved probably a shorter period of time but just as enthusiastically. They're all good candidates. But the key to what we should be about is winning the election in 2008."

Winning the presidency, not the Democratic primary, seems to be the goal of the unions that have already endorsed candidates.

The United Transportation Union, which made the first labor endorsement, on Aug. 28, made sure to call Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton a "winner." Harold A. Schaitberger, president of the International Association of Fire Fighters, said the endorsement of Sen. Chris Dodd was "about who has the ability to win the election."

Clinton also has been endorsed by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers.

Edwards, who has been working hard to secure labor endorsements, got one this week from the International Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners. The United Steelworkers and the United Mine Workers of America are also expected to endorse soon at an event in Pittsburgh, although a final decision on a candidate has not been made.

Figuring out who to support - Clinton? Sen. Barack Obama? Someone else? - is not as easy as it was in the past, union leaders say. "Each in their own way has been very supportive," said Terence M. O'Sullivan, president of the Laborers International Union of North America. The AFL-CIO, the nation's largest labor federation, won't immediately endorse a candidate in the Democratic primary. Change to Win, whose seven unions broke away from the AFL-CIO, will hear from the candidates individually in Chicago in September. "John Edwards has done the most with our members over the years," said Andy Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union. "But clearly the people in New York have a very positive feeling about Hillary, and our Illinois members are in love with Obama, so it's complicated."

Union endorsements can be key to a primary campaign for not only the money and momentum a union can provide, but the sheer manpower unions can throw behind a candidate in the form of motivated workers to man phone banks, hand out leaflets and promote for politicians. The problem, unions say, is that all the Democratic candidates are pro-union. "All of the candidates on the Democratic side of the ticket, they're all speaking our language," said Gerald McEntee, president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.

There have been clear union candidates in the past, like Richard Gephardt, who as a Missouri congressman racked up several union endorsements during his failed runs for the Democratic presidential nomination. Gephardt was a favorite because of his loyalty to union causes, but he never made it out of the Democratic primaries. Edwards and Kucinich are union favorites now, relentlessly advocating for union support at every campaign stop. "As long as I'm alive and breathing, I will be standing with you," Edwards told Iowa union members, pledging to walk a picket line as president if elected.

But Kucinich is considered a long shot for the nomination, and Edwards is trailing front-runners Clinton and Obama in polls. "If electability wasn't a problem, Kucinich would be the front-runner," said Robert Bruno, a professor at the Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations at the University of Illinois at Chicago. Not getting the first or the majority of union endorsements by no means eliminates either Edwards or Kucinich. Both are presidential campaign veterans, and it only takes one or two endorsements from unions to survive the brutal primary season.

Sen. John Kerry's 2004 candidacy got a major boost from the International Association of Fire Fighters. Their endorsement kept him in the race after the almost-coronated favorite Howard Dean and Gephardt flamed out in the early primaries.

Having so many friends in the primaries may also keep some unions on the sidelines, with not enough of their membership behind a single candidate to make an endorsement worth it. Those unions may wait until there's a clear front-runner to jump in. In Nevada, the 60,000-member Culinary Workers Union is key but has said repeatedly it has no plans to endorse early and is looking closely at candidates' viability. "We don't anticipate an early endorsement," said O'Sullivan of the Laborers, who were the top labor contributors to federal candidates and parties in 2004, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

In the end, having so many allies running for the Democratic nomination means more say with whoever wins, unions say.

Having to choose between friends? "I think it's a nice problem to have," McEntee said.

By Jesse J. Holland, Associated Press, September 1, 2007

Senator repeats call for withdraw of troops from Iraq as she campaigns

Syracuse - Surrounded by supporters at every turn during her ninth visit to the New York State Fair, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton reiterated her goal of bringing U.S. troops home from Iraq.

"Our young men and women have done everything they've been asked to do," Clinton said Friday in a luncheon speech to about 500 supporters. "Our military has done it magnificently, but there is no military solution. I've been there (to Iraq) three times - we need to start bringing them home, and when we bring them home we owe them everything."

In a meeting Friday with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, President Bush heard deep concerns from leaders of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines about strains that are building on the force - and on troops' families - as a result of lengthy and repeated tours in Iraq.

Clinton said she expected to be informed of what was discussed.

"I want to know exactly what he (Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Peter Pace) told the president, what he believes to be the strains, and what we're going to do about it," Clinton said. "Our troops are stretched thin. They need help. They need time off from deployments and the pace that they're being subjected to."

Clinton spoke a day after being endorsed by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, her second major union backing this week. She secured the endorsement of the 125,000-member United Transportation Union on Tuesday, the first national union endorsement of the 2008 presidential campaign.

Earlier Friday, a top Democratic fundraiser who had raised money for Clinton's presidential bid turned himself in to California authorities to face a grand theft charge. Norman Hsu, who was wanted as a fugitive in California, was ordered held on $2 million bond.

A warrant was issued for his arrest after he skipped sentencing for a 1991 grand theft charge.

After he fled, Hsu became a top donor to numerous Democratic candidates, also contributing to Sen. Barack Obama's past Senate campaign and his political action committee.

After reports surfaced this week of Hsu's fugitive status, Clinton joined other candidates in returning thousands of dollars he raised. "I was surprised like everybody else who knew him," said Clinton.

By John Kekis, Associated Press, September 1, 2007

WASHINGTON - Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards on Saturday joined three other Democrats who say they will skip states that break party rules by holding early primaries. Their decision is a major boost to the primacy of four early voting states - Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina - and a welcome development to the Democratic National Committee.

"We believe Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina play a unique and special role in the nominating process," Clinton campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle said. "And we believe the DNC's rules and its calendar provide the necessary structure to respect and honor that role."

The DNC has tried to impose discipline on a handful of unruly states determined to vote before Feb. 5 and gain influence in the election cycle. "Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina need to be first because in these states ideas count, not just money," Edwards said. "This tried-and-true nominating system is the only way for voters to judge the field based on the quality of the candidate, not the depth of their war chest." Obama said the DNC's nominating process is "in the best interests of our party and our nation." Their pledges came a day after rivals Chris Dodd, Bill Richardson and Joes Biden endorsed the plan, which was promoted by Democratic leaders of the four states that have party approval to hold early contests.

They have now agreed that they won't compete in any other states that vote before Feb. 5, as Florida plans to do and Michigan is poised to do. Their decision is a blow to Florida, which had moved its primary to Jan. 29, and Michigan, where the legislature this week voted to push its primary to Jan. 15. Michigan acted despite the DNC's threat to punish Florida by stripping it of its 210 delegates unless it comes up with another plan in the next four weeks.

The prospect of five candidates bypassing Florida and Michigan would essentially turn those contests into nonbinding beauty contests, with no delegates at stake if the DNC imposed its punishment. Florida Democratic Party executive director Leonard Joseph said Saturday: "No matter which cards we're dealt, Florida's Democrats are going to win the state's 27 electoral votes and elect a Democratic president in 2008. The country needs us." The Florida party chairwoman, Karen Thurman, has criticized the pledge, calling it "a pact to ignore tens of millions of diverse Americans by a selfish, four-state alliance of party insiders."

Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm has encouraged candidates to ignore the pact, saying unfair trade policies and her state's manufacturing crisis were more important than the politics behind which states get to vote early. Granholm has been preparing to sign legislation that would move Michigan's contest to Jan. 15, despite the threat of DNC sanctions. "We expect that all of the Democratic candidates for president will be on the ballot in Michigan on January 15th. We hope that every candidate will campaign here," Granholm said Saturday.

Among Republican presidential contenders, Michigan's decision to jump to Jan. 15 has been popular, said Saul Anuzis, the state's Republican Party chairman. Most of them plan to attend a GOP leadership conference there in September, he said.

Democratic Party rules for this cycle had Iowa's caucuses on Jan. 14, with tests in Nevada Jan. 19, New Hampshire Jan. 22 and South Carolina Jan. 29.

New Hampshire and Iowa are considering earlier contests to maintain their influence, but the pledge does not prohibit candidates from campaigning in those states even if they go earlier than the national party allows. DNC rules committee member Martha Fuller Clark, co-chairwoman of Obama's New Hampshire campaign, applauded Obama's decision. "The rules adopted by the DNC ensure that we recognize American diversity and, at the same time, the tremendous value of retail politics in selecting our next president," she said Saturday. Dodd, Richardson and Biden have the most incentive to keep the contest focused on the states approved by the DNC. They have raised less money and can't afford to organize in multiple states at the same times, especially those with expensive media markets such as Florida and Michigan where Clinton is a substantial favorite in the polls.

Despite leading her rivals in those states, Clinton campaign officials reluctantly agreed to abide by the pledge because the risk of antagonizing activists in Iowa and New Hampshire by refusing to do was too great.

Financial concerns also were a factor for Edwards, who has lagged behind Clinton and Obama in fundraising. Edwards also favored caucuses in Michigan, hoping a strong labor turnout would improve his chances, but the state had been moving toward a primary.

Associated Press, September 1, 2007