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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

By Dan Balz, The Washington Post, December 31, 2007

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has widened his lead in Iowa over Hillary Clinton and John Edwards heading into Thursday's nominating caucuses, according to The Des Moines Register's final Iowa Poll before the 2008 nominating contests.

Obama's rise is the result in part of a dramatic influx of first-time caucusgoers, including a sizable bloc of political independents. Both groups prefer the Illinois senator in what has been a very competitive campaign. Obama was the choice of 32 percent of likely Democratic caucusgoers, up from 28 percent in the Register's last poll in late November, while Clinton, a New York senator, held steady at 25 percent and Edwards, a former North Carolina senator, was virtually unchanged at 24 percent.

The poll reflects continued fluidity in the race even as the end of the yearlong campaign nears. Roughly a third of likely caucusgoers say they could be persuaded to choose someone else before Thursday evening. Six percent were undecided or uncommitted.

The poll also reveals a widening gap between the three-way contest for the lead and the remaining candidates. No other Democrat received support from more than 6 percent of likely caucusgoers.

The findings mark the largest lead of any of the Democratic candidates in the Register's poll all year, underscoring what has been a hard-fought battle among the three well-organized Iowa frontrunners. It is also the only recent poll of Iowa caucusgoers showing Obama with a lead larger than the survey's margin of sampling error, which is plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

The telephone survey of 800 likely Democratic caucusgoers was taken Dec. 27-30.

In an indication of the Obama's appeal in Iowa, Democratic caucusgoers say they prefer change and unity over other leadership characteristics. Selecting a candidate who represents a sharp departure from the status quo is 56-year-old Lansing Democrat John Rethwisch's priority, and his main reason for backing Obama. "I have been seeing more and more something Kennedy-esque coming from Obama," said Rethwisch, Lansing's water and sewer administrator. "But it's always a gamble when you get somebody in there who hasn't got a proven track record."

Thirty percent of the poll's respondents said a candidate's ability to bring about change is the most important, followed by 27 percent who said their priority is choosing a candidate who will be the most successful in unifying the country.

Asked which candidate would do the best on these themes, caucusgoers most commonly name Obama. The first-term U.S. senator has argued in the closing weeks of the campaign that his newness to Washington, D.C., would help him bridge a politically divided nation and improve its standing overseas.

Having the experience and competence to lead, which has been the crux of Clinton's closing argument, was seen as the most important to 18 percent of caucusgoers, with Clinton as the candidate most commonly rated best on this trait.

The candidates routinely argue they are the best able to win in November, although only 6 percent of the poll's respondents identified being best able to win the general election as the top priority.

Rethwisch is also part of the majority of caucusgoers who plan to attend their first caucus Thursday. Sixty percent would be attending for the first time, reflecting the emphasis the campaigns have put on expanding the pool of participants.

All of the three leaders in Iowa draw a majority of support from new caucusgoers, although Obama benefits the most with 72 percent of his support coming from first-timers compared to 58 percent of Clinton's and 55 percent of Edwards'supporters.

Longtime Democrat Darlene Inman, 72, is a first-time caucusgoer who supports Clinton. The Mason City retired homemaker represents the heart of Clinton's support base, older women who are registered Democrats.

"She talks straight about helping everybody. She tells it like it is," Inman said.

Inman said she first motivated to participate in the caucuses because of dissatisfaction with President Bush. But she said she hesitated to back Clinton until she settled on her as the most qualified, in part because of her association former President Clinton.

"I was kind of doubtful, but then I stopped and thought that when Bill Clinton was president, jobs were plentiful and the country was running well," Inman said. "With Bush in there, it's been very worrisome and I think she can get in there and turn it around."

Clinton has made an aggressive effort to court female, first-time caucusgoers, especially younger women and those who are retired. Women account for 58 percent of caucusgoers, according to the survey.

Clinton has rebounded among female caucusgoers in general, pulling even with Obama at 32 percent after losing her edge among this key group to him in the previous Register poll.

Clinton receives more support from women 55 years old and older than her rivals, and she and Obama draw evenly from the pool of female caucusgoers between 35 and 54 years old.

However, she trails Obama badly among women under 35, with just 15 percent to his 57 percent.

Obama's advantage among younger women reflects his decided advantage among younger voters in general. A majority of caucusgoers under 35 support Obama, more than three times the support Edwards receives from them and five times Clinton's.

Caucusgoers under the age of 35 represent 17 percent of likely attendees, higher than any Register poll this year but lower than any other age group.

Clinton led narrowly in the Register's October poll, but slipped in the survey taken in late November. During that period Obama and Edwards sharpened their criticism of Clinton, who has led in national polls of Democratic preference. Likewise, Clinton went on the attack in November, questioning Obama's experience and characterizing his health care proposal as less than comprehensive.

Clinton remains the favorite of the party faithful, with support from a third of self-described Democrats. However, Obama is the clear choice of caucusgoers who affiliate with neither the Democrat or Republican parties, with roughly 40 percent of them backing him in the survey.

The support from non-Democrats is significant because a whopping 40 percent of those planning to attend described themselves as independent and another 5 percent as Republican. Only registered Democrats can participate in the caucuses, although rules allow participants to change their party registration on their way in to the caucuses.

Edwards' support has changed little since the last poll, when he was the choice of 23 percent of likely caucusgoers. He led the Register's May poll with 29 percent.

He remained the choice of older men and drew evenly with Clinton from caucusgoers 55 and older.

One such Democrat, 84-year-old Ruth Paulsen of Milford, said Edwards' charisma and message of economic fairness appeals to her. "I like the way he speaks, with energy and enthusiasm," said Paulsen. "The others are all right, but I like Edwards because he talks the most about change."

Despite aggressive campaigns in Iowa by Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, none has been able to break into the pack at the top. In fact, support for Biden and Richardson slipped somewhat in the new poll.

An analysis of likely caucusgoers' second choices showed that the results would change little if the votes for the lower-rated candidates were redistributed among the front-runners.

By Thomas Beaumont, Des Moines Register, December 31, 2007

3 front-runners hit the Sunday news shows, then pitch their messages across the state, as caucuses loom

DES MOINES -- Think of the Iowa Democratic presidential caucus as a contest of Olympians when it comes to the three front-runners, John Edwards, Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton.

They are all running their personal best. But Thursday night, only one will come in first, and every poll shows it is too close to call.

These political Olympians have field and marketing organizations that have crunched data to death to pinpoint and turn out their likely supporters at these very peculiar public exercises of democracy called Democratic caucuses.

The battle is on the ground and in the air -- Iowa television is saturated with Democratic and GOP ads.

That allies of the cash-strapped Edwards are paying for spots helping him has increasingly become an issue for Obama, as the two battle for the same change-oriented, anti-Clinton, undecided voter. Edwards is on the uptick, some surveys suggest, with the race essentially a tie.

Edwards was on the defensive over those ads when pressed Sunday why he couldn't -- as a candidate running against corporate and special-interest money in politics -- do more to tell his friends to stop. His friends bankrolling the pro-Edwards ads include labor unions and a woman in her mid-90s, an heir to the Mellon fortune who donated $495,000 to one of those independent groups bolstering Edwards' candidacy, with the help of her lawyer, a long-time Edwards booster.

"I don't have control over them," Edwards told Bob Schieffer, host of CBS' "Face the Nation." Schieffer disagreed.

Meanwhile, on NBC's "Meet the Press," host Tim Russert was grilling Obama over a debatable claim in one of his television spots that his health insurance plan will "cover everyone."

Clinton and Edwards have health insurance plans with mandates. Obama's does not -- his relies more on market forces and government bullying to lower the costs of insurance. It has been a big issue.

Obama sidestepped whether his spot was a stretch. He said that under his plan, if people waited to buy insurance until they got sick, they should pay a penalty.

On ABC's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos," Clinton was lowering expectations in case she stumbles in Iowa. She's in the race for the "long term," she said.

After the shows, Edwards, Clinton and Obama barnstormed through Iowa.

The Obama and Clinton campaigns worked to crank up black voter turnout in Des Moines. Clinton visited an African-American church with daughter Chelsea. Both teams dispatched African-American surrogates to black churches.

At Union Baptist Church, Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.) delivered a stem-winder for Obama.

"It is real easy for me to come to Iowa and say we can win this little ol' state. And we can win New Hampshire and we can win South Carolina. We can elect us a president. All we got to do is believe. All we got to do is show up on time and caucus with someone," said Jackson.

I'm writing this at an Obama rally, in the gym at the Nathan Weeks Middle School here, in a delegate-rich part of Polk County. The precincts around here are supposedly Clinton turf. The place is packed as Obama is doing his stump speech for the fourth time today.

Earlier, I went to a rally for Edwards at another school here, and the hall was full.

Today, the front-runners will campaign up to and including New Year's Eve. This morning, Obama campaign manager David Plouffe will hold a conference call to assess the campaign, no matter the Iowa outcome.

"Seven days from now, we'll be at a rally in New Hampshire," Plouffe said as we talked in the gym. New Hampshire votes Jan. 8.

By Lynn Sweet, Chicago Sun-Times, December 31, 2007

DES MOINES - Just before the stroke of midnight on Monday, Senator Barack Obama will gather his Iowa staff members and volunteers from across the state, so they can all celebrate the new year together.

On a conference call.

So goes this New Year's Eve in Iowa, at least among the thousands of campaign staff members, volunteers, contributors, journalists and other hangers-on hunkering down in anticipation of the caucus here on Thursday. With many polls showing both the Democratic and Republican races as true tossups, 2008 arrives amid grueling last-minute campaign sprints. And instead of new beginnings, the turn of the calendar could mean, for some campaigns, the beginning of their ends.

The result is likely to be the most bizarre New Year's Eve many here can remember. There is a veneer of festivity - not every campaign's approach is as ascetic as Mr. Obama's - but it is a thin and transparent one. For many, the holiday feels cruelly ill-timed: How can they gaily celebrate the start of 2008 when in fact they are consumed with anxiety about what happens two days later?

"No one knows what 2008 will bring in terms of the political process," said Carolyn Weyforth, deputy communications director for former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, whose once-comfortable lead in the Iowa polls has been erased by former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas. "The rest of the country is worried about whether they are going to lose weight this year, and our immediate thought is what's going to happen Jan. 3 and Jan. 8," she said, referring to the dates of the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary.

While the campaigns took a mutually agreed-upon timeout for Christmas, New Year's Eve could play host to crucial developments in the race. Candidates will be campaigning up to and even throughout the evening, meaning that a major gaffe or verbal fusillades among contenders are possibilities. And The Des Moines Register is planning to release its final precaucus poll in its Jan. 1 issue, which will hit the paper's Web site in the final hours of Dec. 31.

There will be parties, of course: the campaigns of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, Mr. Huckabee and Mr. Romney are holding events in downtown Des Moines; the campaign of former Senator John Edwards is having one at its office in Mason City; and Senator Christopher J. Dodd is holding one in Dubuque. It is a chance for the campaigns to thank their troops and rally them for the complex get-out-the-vote operation to come, but also to maintain some control of their mostly young staffs and volunteers on a night known for too much revelry. Campaigning will begin again early the next morning, and everyone must be ready for cheerful knocks on doors and articulate phone calls.

"No campaign wants to wake up on Jan. 2 with a D.U.I. story," said Jenny Backus, a longtime Democratic strategist with no ties to any of the contenders.

For the candidates with the lowest standing in the polls, the parties will probably have an elegiac air. Mr. Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut, has pinned his primary hopes on this state - he even moved here - and polls suggest he has virtually no chance of winning on Thursday. So his party sounds much like a goodbye-and-thank-you affair. "We're going to be celebrating all the work the senator and the volunteers have put in over the last year," said Colleen Flanagan, his press secretary.

Usually there is an elaborate social pecking order to those who descend on Des Moines right before a caucus, from the top strategists and donors mingling at downtown restaurants to the humble college students who bunk on sleeping bags in church basements. But this year, the former have become a lot more like the latter, with some of the powerful, influential types doing the lowliest of volunteer tasks.

Bettylu Saltzman, a Chicago philanthropist, spent her last New Year's vacationing in the Dominican Republic, and the one before that at her ski house in Colorado. This year, she has come to Iowa to canvass for Mr. Obama and has little idea of how she will spend the evening. "We're taking a Scrabble set," she said, to use at her hotel room.

Steve Elmendorf, a Democratic consultant who served as deputy campaign manager for Senator John Kerry in 2004, is volunteering for Mrs. Clinton in Waterloo - not commanding others, but doing the knocking and calling himself. Asked how he would spend the evening, he couldn't quite say. "Maybe back in my hotel room at the Ramada?"

While the top Des Moines restaurants have been booked for weeks, many of the political and news media celebrities who usually occupy those tables before the caucus are not arriving until Tuesday. The reporters and consultants who will fill those establishments, meanwhile, face the prospect of spending the most social night of the year with colleagues instead of loved ones. It's not quite spending Valentine's Day with co-workers, but it's close.

"Even the best work party is still work," said Jay Carson, a spokesman for the Clinton campaign, who said he would try to slip away with his girlfriend but would probably spend most of the evening at campaign events instead.

The transformation of New Year's Eve into a work night seems like the logical, inevitable conclusion of a race that has swallowed the personal lives of everyone involved in it.

Take Jamie Smith, a member of Mrs. Clinton's traveling staff. Before she was hired or the caucus date was set, she planned her wedding for Monday night in Chicago. The wedding will last until 2 or 3 in the morning, she said, and a few hours later, she and her new husband will drive west so she can rejoin the campaign.

What about connubial bliss? Her new husband?

"I want Hillary Rodham Clinton to win so much," explained the bride, "and I love her tons."

By Jodi Kantor, The New York Times, December 31, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Hillary Rodham Clinton is the top 2008 United States presidential contender for Democratic Party supporters in Iowa, according to a review of the last four publicly released voting intention surveys. 30 per cent of decided voters in the Hawkeye State would vote for the New York senator in January's caucus.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 27 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 26.8 per cent, New Mexico governor Bill Richardson with 7.7 per cent, Delaware senator Joe Biden with 5.6 per cent, Connecticut senator Chris Dodd with 1.9 per cent, and Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich with 0.8 per cent.

Since 1976, the Iowa caucus has kicked off the process of finding presidential nominees for the two major political parties in the United States. The caucus differs from a presidential primary because the casting of ballots in favour of a particular candidate is preceded by a "gathering of neighbours" where specific platform issues are discussed.

In 2004, Massachusetts senator John Kerry won the Democratic Iowa caucus with 38 per cent, followed by Edwards with 32 per cent, former Vermont governor Howard Dean with 18 per cent, Missouri congressman Dick Gephardt with 11 per cent, and Kucinich with one per cent.

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, December 31, 2007

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Hillary Rodham Clinton is leading the United States presidential race among Democratic Party supporters in the Granite State, according to a review of the last four publicly released voting intention surveys. 34.2 per cent of decided voters would support the New York senator in January's primary.

Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 32.4 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 21.6 per cent, followed by New Mexico governor Bill Richardson with 5.3 per cent, Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich with 3.5 per cent, Delaware senator Joe Biden with 2.3 per cent, and Connecticut senator Chris Dodd with 0.6 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.

The Democratic New Hampshire primary will take place on Jan. 8, 2008.

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, December 31, 2007

DES MOINES - Iowa is packed with presidential candidates and hundreds of campaign aides, advisers and contributors. Twenty-five hundred representatives of news organizations have been granted credentials to cover the caucuses on Thursday night, twice as many as in 2004. Rarely has a political event been so intensely anticipated as a decisive moment, at least on the Democratic side. (It is different for Republicans since many of their major candidates are not competing fully here).

But what if it is not decisive?

What if at the end of Thursday, the three leading Democrats - John Edwards, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and Senator Barack Obama - are separated by a percentage point, or even less, leaving no one with the clear right of delivering a victory speech, or the burden of conceding? A number of polls going into the finals days that of have suggested that after all of this, the Democratic caucus on Thursday night will end up more or less as a tie.

In truth, amid all the endless permutations of possible outcomes that are being discussed - can Mrs. Clinton survive a third -place finish, or Mr. Edwards a second-place one? - aides are beginning to grapple with the frustrating possibility that all the time, money, and political skill invested here might prove to be for naught when it comes to identifying the candidate to beat in the primaries and winnowing down the top tier.

Rather than clarify the state of play and consolidate this crowded field a bit, an outcome like that would almost certainly muddle it further and potentially extend the time before Democrats know their nominee.

Since none of them would be judged a decisive loser, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Edwards and Mr. Obama would all be able to go on to New Hampshire, no questions asked. It would be hard for any candidate to play the "I beat expectations game" and claim some sort of chimerical victory, much the way Bill Clinton proclaimed himself the winner after coming in second in New Hampshire in 1992. And you can bet this: the other Democrats in the race - Christopher J. Dodd, Joseph R. Biden Jr., Bill Richardson and Dennis Kucinich - would feel less of the morning-after-Iowa pressure to pull out.

New Hampshire, which for Democrats has seemed something like a stepchild in this year's nominating process given all the attention being paid to Iowa, would get a chance to have some real influence over the nomination. For 25 years, there has been debate and study about how the outcome in Iowa affects New Hampshire voters. This time around, because of the decision by the state's secretary of state, Bill Gardner, to set the New Hampshire primary on Jan. 8, voters would just have five days to examine the candidates and make their decision.

One of the bedrock political assumptions of the year - and certainly one that has informed Mrs. Clinton's campaign - is that winning Iowa and New Hampshire would set the table for sweeping the 20 or so states that vote or hold caucuses on Feb. 5, the day when many Democrats believe that their contest would effectively be decided. But if Iowans ended up being equally divided among what many party leaders view as an unusually strong cast of candidates, who is to say that voters in the Feb. 5 states will not be as well?

None of this is meant to suggest that an outcome like this would mean that what has taken place here over the past year was insignificant. Quite the contrary. Watching these candidates, both Democrats and Republicans, deliver their final speeches, take the last round of questions from Iowans and shake hands of supporters, it seemed hard to dispute that most of these candidates are much better at this than they were a year ago.

Mr. Obama's campaign manager, David Plouffe, an old Iowa caucus hand who has moved here to help out in the final days, said as much in explaining why he would be comfortable with even an inconclusive outcome. "The experience here in Iowa has been tremendous for the entire campaign," he said.

By Adam Nagourney, The New York Times, December 31, 2007

Iowa Falls, Ia. - Iowans have noticied that Democrat Hillary Clinton is not taking public questions from audiences during her final-push campaign rallies. After her 40-minute monologue ended shortly before 10 p.m. Sunday, Clinton immediately began to sign autographs, pose for photographs and listen to caucusgoers' concerns one on one.

Iowa Falls resident Alene Rickels, 51, when asked her thoughts about the event, said: "Her speech was really good, but it would've been interesting to see how she reacted to questions. "I really thought she would take questions," said Rickels, a middle school teacher. "It's late in the day, so I'm assuming that that's the reason. I don't know what she did the rest of the day."

Clinton took no questions from audiences at any of her stops earlier Sunday, in Vinton, Traer and Cedar Falls.

That message control raised eyebrows for other caucusgoers.

Lee Weber, 53, of Mason City caught Democrat Joe Biden at lunchtime Sunday, Democrat Christopher Dodd after supper then hopped in the car to see Clinton in Iowa Falls.

"Biden wins today," said Weber, who teaches at a community college. "Excellent presentation. He took questions. And I've been impressed with his message for a long time."

Biden opens himself up to questions from the audience every single event. Lately, he's been shortening his stump speeches considerably to allow time for more questions from the audience.

As for the press, Biden makes himself available at any event where several cameras are present and reporters are interested. Because he typically attracts few reporters, anyone who wants a few minutes with him afterward can generally arrange it with his staff.

Since returning to Iowa after a short Christmas holiday, Clinton has opened herself up to public questions just one time - at an event Friday in Story City. She has made herself available to questions from the pool of reporters covering her once, after a rally in Eldridge Saturday.

Democrat Barack Obama takes questions from the audience at almost every event. He rarely does press availabilities and will generally decline to answer reporters' questions if they approach him while he is shaking hands. His staff, also, guards him quite closely to prevent media from asking him questions.

In contrast, Democrat John Edwards takes several questions at every event, and tells people that if he didn't get to them, they should either e-mail their questions to his web site or write them down and hand them to one of his aides, and he or someone from the campaign will answer the question before the caucuses.

"It's my responsibility to answer your questions," he tells audiences. He makes himself available to reporters two or three per day and routinely has reporters take turns interviewing him on his bus between stops.

This has been Edwards' habit since the beginning of the campaign, when Edwards was ahead.

On the Republican side, Mitt Romney did "Ask Mitt Anything" events before Christmas in which he took questions. Lately though, he shakes hands but takes no audience questions. In the past he's done one press availability a day, but recently it's become spotty.





By Jennifer Jacobs, Des Moines Register, December 31, 2007

Republicans and Democrats Have Three Days Until the Nation's First Caucus

Though presidential hopefuls have been campaigning for months, the race to the 2008 presidential election officially begins with the Iowa caucuses, which are only three days away.

While many potential ballot casters are preparing to usher in the new year, the candidates are putting up their last-ditch efforts to woo Hawkeye State residents.

"I think every candidate who wants to be president is desperately doing what ever they can to get that final margin in a race that can be decided by 200 votes," said ABC News political contributor Matthew Dowd on "Good Morning America" today.

A Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll has former first lady Hillary Clinton leading her Democratic rivals with 29 percent. But she can hardly be considered a sure thing, as Sen. Barack Obama and John Edwards have 26 percent and 25 percent, respectively.

The tight race has Obama and Edwards fighting to retain and gain some of the undecided voters in Iowa, and Obama argues this is the time to hope.

"I think Barack Obama needs to win Iowa. He has to show Hillary is vulnerable," Dowd said.

Clinton, who visited nine towns across the state during the weekend, repeated the same message at each stop: It takes experience to make a change, and she's the candidate who can win.

"A lot of people are deciding what is the most important issue of all; who can be the president; who is ready on day one. I have taken the incoming fire for about 26 years, and much to their dismay I'm still standing," Clinton told supporters.

Dowd said former President Clinton has given the New York senator a boost on the campaign trail.

"I think her husband being president has provided her a great asset to a degree," he said. "In the end, people are going to vote on whether Hillary Clinton can be president or not."

Other Democratic candidates, like New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, have received much less press during the lead-up to the caucuses. "You know, if you listen to national media, the pundits in New York, there are only two or three candidates, but we are going to show them. We are going to shock the world," Richardson said.

Richardson had his biggest rally ever during the weekend at a Des Moines restaurant, while Sen. Joe Biden discussed murmurs that he would be a good secretary of state, asking Iowans if they were ready to vote for someone who wanted more than that.

In Edwards' final appeal to voters, he pressed the issue of fighting special interests, saying the Democratic nominee should have guts and determination.

The Republicans

While the top three Democrats remain within striking distance of one another, the Republicans find two former governors as the front-runners in Iowa. Polls show Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney running neck-in-neck in Iowa, as Romney's last-minute attack ads have seemed to chip away at Huckabee's lead.

"I think at this point, Mike Huckabee has to win," Dowd said. Dowd added the attacks have hurt Huckabee in part because until a few weeks ago, voters knew very little about him.

The former Arkansas governor hasn't been content to merely sit back in response to the negative advertisements. Huckabee has released a new ad.

"If you love negative campaigning you've got to be loving the last few days of this election," Huckabee says in the ad. "But if you love our country, you've got to be thinking enough is enough."

Huckabee has pushed honesty as part of his closing arguments and suggested Romney lacks the quality.

"He will likely not start being honest on the job, if he had to be dishonest to get there," Huckabee said.

Despite his attack ads, Romney's closing message to potential caucus goers was one of optimism.

"I'm convinced that what makes us the strongest nation on Earth is the heart and values of the American people," he said.

And while the men duke it out, Fred Thompson has set his expectations high, saying he needs to come in second to stay in the race. The former Tennessee actor has offered consistent common sense conservatism as his final pitch.

Rudy Giuliani and Sen. John McCain are expected to make no closing arguments at all. The men have set their sights on other states, whose primaries come later in the year. They'll be happy with whatever they can get in Iowa.

ABC News, December 31, 2007

Candidates Hit Different Notes on the Same Theme in Iowa

The Democratic presidential campaign in Iowa has been transformed into a freewheeling contest over the meaning of a single word: change.

Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards wants to usher in change in drastic fashion, with a populist wave he wants to use to swamp special interests. To New York Sen. Hillary Clinton - and to several second-tier Democrats who are fighting to make their voices heard - change is a more gradual process, requiring deep experience and expertise to massage a complicated process.

And to Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, change is a deeply rooted campaign theme: It starts with his biography, and extends through his broad promise to remake the nation's politics.

Obama Touts 'American People' as Change Agents

"Ultimately it is the American people who are the real change agents in this country," Obama said Sunday in Newton, with a banner behind him reading "Change We Believe In," and a huge sign off to his right stating "Jasper County Stands for Change."

"We can't afford a politics that spends all its time tearing opponents down instead of lifting the country up," Obama said. "The real gamble in this election is having the same old folks doing the same old thing over and over and over again and somehow expecting a different result."

The Democrats' intense focus on change taps into deep-seated anger among party activists at the Bush administration. All of the Democrats regularly rail against President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, even though Bush and Cheney have appeared on their last ballot.

Candidates Showcase Personal Histories

In appealing to the desire for change, the candidates are using different elements of their personal histories to present themselves as the person who is best prepared to deliver.

Edwards cites his working-class background and refusal to accept money from political action committees to craft a populist appeal that angrily denounces special interests. His central claim: that it's impossible to negotiate with "the big corporations and powerful interests who control Washington."

"I want to be absolutely clear that the corporate greed that is destroying the middle class of this country and stealing your children's future, it is stealing the future of Democrats' children, Independents' children, Republicans' children," Edwards said at a campaign stop Sunday in Boone, Iowa. "This is a message and a cause we can unite America around."

Clinton talks about her experience in the Senate and as first lady in arguing that she could handle the job as president immediately upon taking office. Her closing argument is more subdued than the fiery appeals being offered by Obama and Edwards.

"It is time to pick a president; the stakes are high, the job is hard," she said Sunday in Vinton, Iowa. "We know there are challenges we can't foresee. We know we have to pick a president who is ready to lead on day one."

Selling an Alternative to Partisan Politics

Meanwhile, the other Democrats who are struggling to register in Iowa - Sens. Joe Biden and Chris Dodd, and Gov. Bill Richardson - are portraying themselves as alternatives to the partisanship that has long defined presidential politics.

"John Edwards and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama - all really good people, but everyone knows that that's going to spark a really spirited, spirited fight that's not likely to change in tone from the last election," Biden said Sunday on CNN. "Whereas if I were nominated as the Democrat, or Chris Dodd for that matter dominated as the Democrat, you would see the boiling point lower a great deal. And we both have long records of cooperating extensively with Republicans, without yielding one bit on our principles."

Negative Campaigning and the Caucuses

Candidates in Iowa are often careful not to engage in overtly negative attacks on their opponents. Caucus-goers are known to bristle at negative campaigning, and the Byzantine rules of the Iowa caucuses make second choices important, meaning no candidate wants to alienate another candidate's supporters.

"What you enter that night [with] in that caucus room is not going to be your final tally," said David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager. "There's a remarkable amount of fluidity in the race right now."

Questioning Opponents in a Fluid Race

But the Democrats are finding ways to question their opponents' ability to bring about change. Obama, who has made change central to his argument from the start, is calling into question the other candidates' backgrounds in building himself up as the candidate of change.

"I think it's good that Democrats and Republicans and independents recognize that it's time for change. I think the question you ought to ask yourself is, who can best deliver such change? Who is best equipped to make change happen?" Obama said in Newton on Sunday.

"We don't need somebody to play the game better in Washington, we need to put a new game plan in Washington," he said.

By Rick Klein, ABC News, December 31, 2007

US presidential hopefuls are campaigning hard ahead of a tight Iowa caucus, the first big test in the battle for their party's nomination.

Most of the top Republican and Democrat candidates have been crisscrossing Iowa for days, pushing their message home.

The caucuses - simultaneous meetings held at 1,784 locations across the state - will be held on 3 January.

Thousands of political activists have been dispatched by both parties to attend political meetings in the state.

On the Democratic front, a Reuters/C-Span/Zogby poll released at the weekend gives Hillary Clinton a slight lead in Iowa, with Barak Obama and John Edwards fighting for second place.

Mrs Clinton was scheduled to spend New Year's Eve at a late-night rally with her husband Bill in Iowa's capital Des Moines.

Mr Obama was to cross the state attending a total of five rallies on Monday.

Momentum

Mr Edwards, who polls show has gained momentum in Iowa, was sending out hundreds of volunteers on a state-wide canvass.

The same Reuters/C-Span/Zogby poll also suggested a tight Republican contest between former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney.

"It's about as close as you can get at the top in both races," pollster John Zogby said. "But it's still very uncertain."

Republican John McCain solidified his hold on third place, with former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who has maintained a low-key presence in Iowa, some way behind.

A McClatchy-MSNBC poll, also released over the weekend, gave Mr Edwards a single percentage point lead in Iowa over Mrs Clinton, while Mr Romney was just ahead of Mr Huckabee.

On Sunday, Mrs Clinton said that even third place in Iowa would not spell disaster heading into the New Hampshire primary on 8 January.

"I believe that this campaign will be bunched up, I think the history out of Iowa shows that a lot of people live to fight another day," Mrs Clinton told ABC News.

Other leading candidates took to the airwaves on Sunday, with Mr Huckabee using the opportunity to lash out at his nearest rival.

He accused Mr Romney of trying to mislead voters with adverts targeting his record on taxes, illegal immigration and foreign policy views.

Experience

"Mitt Romney is running a very desperate and, frankly, a dishonest campaign," Mr Huckabee said on NBC. He also questioned whether Mr Romney could be trusted with the presidency.

For their part, Mr Romney's team accused Mr Huckabee of "testiness and irritability".

In his closing message on the NBC's Meet the Press on Sunday morning Mr Obama acknowledged that the criticism about his lack of experience in Washington might be taking a toll.

"That may have some effect, but ultimately I'm putting my faith in the people of Iowa and the people of America that they want something better," he said.

Mrs Clinton, on the other hand, played on her experience, telling This Week that she had once been "intimately involved in so much that went on in the White House, here at home and around the world".

Candidates who do well in Iowa and New Hampshire can gain momentum and media attention, establishing themselves as front-runners.

BBC News, December 31, 2007

WASHINGTON -- Two multimillionaires in the presidential race - two ways to spend their money. Republican Mitt Romney has pumped more than $17 million of his own into his race; Democrat John Edwards, by law, can tap his fortune for no more than $50,000.

What a difference public financing makes.

Romney has chosen to bypass the taxpayer-financed presidential campaign fund, a move that lets him use his wealth without limitation. If he has put more of his money in during the past three months, his campaign isn't saying. The public won't find out until Jan. 31, when Romney must submit campaign finance reports to the Federal Election Commission.

Edwards has been certified to get $8.8 million in public funds, and he plans to collect. The step not only restricts his spending, it also prohibits him from dipping into his personal wealth. Meanwhile, his campaign is getting more than $2 million in help from labor-backed independent groups.

Presidential candidates and their allies are spending money like never before, and some candidates head into the New Year with big decisions ahead - to lend, to borrow, to accept millions in public matching funds.

Romney and Edwards are two bookends in the presidential election financing system. Their distinct approaches are both convenient and risky and they exemplify the evolution of a public financing system that is now seen as a resource of last resort.

Republican John McCain illustrates the dilemma. He has been certified to receive $5.8 million in matching funds but is keeping his options open. He has a $3 million line of credit, secured with future fundraising and the value of his mailing list. McCain can wait to see how he performs in the New Hampshire primary Jan. 8 before deciding whether he wants to collect the public funds or capture a surge of new donor money.

"Candidates are adopting whatever approach can get them the greatest amount of money," said Anthony Corrado, an expert on political money at Colby College in Maine. "Romney is willing to tap into his personal fortune to remain competitive. Candidates like Edwards or McCain who don't have resources to match the leading candidates can tap public money."

Romney, a former venture capitalist, and his wife Ann have assets worth between $190 million and $250 million. Aides have said money will not be a problem for the Romney campaign. As of the end of September, he had lent his campaign $17.4 million and raised $44.8 million from donors. Romney has been spending heavily on advertising in Iowa and New Hampshire, lately averaging $1.5 million a week or more. Like other candidates, Romney has been focused on winning votes in the early contest states and has cut back from the frenetic fundraising pace all the candidates kept during the first nine months of the year. But aides would not reveal whether he had tapped his fortune for more money during the last quarter of the year. By the time the campaign is required to make that information public, several key contests will have already occurred. "We will have the resources to keep building our organization through these early contests and beyond," Romney spokesman Kevin Madden said.

Edwards had raised $30 million by the end of September, significantly trailing rivals Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton. At that point, the campaign decided to seek public funds.

Under the presidential financing system, candidates get matching funds for every donor's contribution of up $250. If they accept the money, they must abide by spending limits in each primary and caucus state as well as an overall cap on primary spending. Those restrictions have prompted most of the leading candidates to decide to forgo the public money.

Edwards has so far spent more than $5 million on advertising in Iowa and New Hampshire. He's also getting help from independent, mostly labor-financed groups that have drawn criticism from watchdog groups and from Obama. The groups, called "527" organizations for the section of the IRS code that authorizes them, have been running ads supporting Edwards' policies in Iowa during the closing days of the campaign there.

Edwards, who made his fortune as a trial lawyer with his wealth somewhere between $12.8 million and $60 million, has refused donations from political action committees and lobbyists and has cast himself as the candidate less connected to Washington special interests. But Obama and other critics say the 527 groups are simply special interests helping him in another guise. Though labor groups have supplied much of the financing, one of the donors is a 97-year-old heiress to the Mellon family fortune.

Edwards has offered a finely honed response, saying he opposes the 527 organizations, but is proud of having the support of unions. "They're not running any negative, no attack ads. This is just positive advertising," he said of the groups Sunday on CBS. "But that aside, I think these 527s need to be banned. I didn't want them running advertising, and I've continued to say that every time I've been asked. But I can't stop these people. I don't have control over them."

McCain, though certified to receive his share of matching public money, doesn't have to accept it and can technically wait until March, when the money would officially become available, to decide. To do that, however, he has to abide by the spending limits now.

That opens some options and closes others. McCain can use his existing funds, including the line of credit he obtained, to cover campaign costs through the New Hampshire primary. If he wins there, he would likely see a significant influx of new campaign money, forcing a reconsideration of whether he needs the public matching funds.

"We've stayed under the caps, so that if necessary, that we can" collect the public money, he said Sunday on ABC. "We bought all the media that's necessary and all we can in New Hampshire."

McCain can't use the matching funds as collateral for his loans unless he decides to take it. His campaign lawyer, Trevor Potter, said the line of credit is not secured by the matching funds, but by the campaign's fundraising mail list and the promise of future fundraising. Potter, a former chairman of the Federal Election Commission, said banks typically look at a candidate's fundraising history and require pledges from candidates that they will tap donors on that list to repay the loan, if necessary.

If McCain gets knocked out of the presidential contest, he would be allowed to shift his debt to his Senate election account. That would permit him to tap donors anew while occupying senior positions on influential Senate committees. His only restriction would be that he could not tell donors that the money was meant to retire his debt.

"It's easier to take the higher risk financial strategies when you're a sitting member of the Senate," Corrado said. "You still have fundraising wherewithal."

As they candidates fight for votes and against each other, financial decisions will ultimately determine how far they can go without some victories.

"For Romney the real trick at this point is if he loses Iowa and New Hampshire, then he has to decide, 'OK, I will write a big check and see this through,'" Corrado said. "If McCain doesn't win New Hampshire, do they take the public money to try to see it through. Two big decisions."




CBS News, December 31, 2007

DES MOINES, Iowa (Reuters) - For presidential candidates in Iowa, it's not just about winning or losing. It's how you play the expectations game.

The big winner of Iowa's kick-off presidential nominating contest on Thursday may not come in first, and the big loser could be a candidate who finishes ahead of most of the field.

The goal is beating expectations -- and every four years the early voting states of Iowa and New Hampshire elevate or doom candidates who confound predictions and pull a surprise.

"It's not like a football game where you look at the scoreboard and see who won," said Dennis Goldford, a political analyst at Drake University in Des Moines. "Politics is like judging ice skating -- it's interpretive."

Iowa has produced some memorable examples of the expectations game at work. In 1976, Democrat Jimmy Carter was a largely unknown governor who finished second to "undecided," but it earned him enough good publicity to launch a run that put him in the White House.

In 1984, former Vice President Walter Mondale trounced Democrat Gary Hart in Iowa, but Hart's second-place finish drew enough attention to propel him to a New Hampshire win and put a scare into Mondale, the ultimate nominee.

Aware of the risks, politicians work hard to keep expectations low. Democrat Hillary Clinton, who led Iowa polls for months, frequently emphasizes what a difficult challenge she faces in the state.

"When I started here, I was in single digits. I mean, nobody expected me to be doing as well as I'm doing in Iowa," Clinton, one of the best-known politicians in the United States, said on ABC's "This Week" on Sunday.

Clinton is in a three-way fight with Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards. One of them has to finish third -- a spot that will be hard to spin in a positive light.

TWO TICKETS OUT OF IOWA?

"The old saying is there are three tickets out of Iowa, but this time there might be only two," said Gordon Fischer, a former Democratic state party chairman and an Obama supporter. "Barring a really, really close finish, third place is going to be very damaging."

Edwards could have the toughest expectations in Iowa, considered a make-or-break state for him after he finished a strong second during his failed 2004 campaign and essentially kept on campaigning after the November 2004 election.

Among Republicans, Mitt Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, entered Iowa with perhaps the most to lose. He led polls in the state almost all year until former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee recently shot past him.

Romney's recent struggles have reduced expectations of an easy victory, making an eventual win now seem more impressive.

"Huckabee has done Romney a favor by giving him a serious challenge," Goldford said.

Even the battle for lower spots could offer solace for some lucky loser. A strong fourth-place finish by a second-tier Democrat like Biden, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson or Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd could keep them going.

Among Republicans, Arizona Sen. John McCain and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani have largely bypassed Iowa to focus on later states, and third place could give them a boost there.

But McCain faces a must-win in New Hampshire, where he has put all his focus and which votes just five days after Iowa. He won the state during his failed 2000 presidential bid.

"Sometimes you can come in not first and still, quote, 'win,' because of the expectations game," McCain said on Sunday on NBC. "But we have to do very well here in New Hampshire."

By John Whitesides, Reuters, December 31, 2007

VINTON, Iowa - Meet John Edwards, Hillary Clinton's baby-faced tormenter - and the guy who just might be her last, best hope to stop Barack Obama in the early primary states.

Edwards, who is enjoying a late surge in the New Hampshire and Iowa polls, has staked his candidacy on a strong showing in the Hawkeye State, where his grassroots support is the envy of the Democratic field. But he's also gaining ground in the Granite State - New Hampshire - where he's moved from the low teens in early December polling into the low 20s this week.

Edwards has hammered Clinton on campaign finance and for her refusal to recant her Iraq war vote, but his rise, perversely, helps Clinton by dividing the anti-Clinton vote among two candidates.

"Clinton needs a viable John Edwards - her worst-case scenario is that Obama takes first place and Edwards comes in third here," said University of Iowa pollster David Redlawski. "If Edwards falls into irrelevance, that really hurts her because he's splitting the vote against her."

Clinton's advisers worry what will happen if Edwards were to falter in Iowa, according to sources in the campaign. His collapse could deliver his supporters, overwhelmingly anti-Clinton, to Obama in numbers great enough to push deadlocked New Hampshire and South Carolina into the Illinois senator's column.

The former North Carolina senator is locked in a three-way tie with his two rivals and a Mason-Dixon poll here released yesterday has Edwards leading with 24 percent, with Clinton and Obama at 23 and 22 percent, respectively.

"We're surging at exactly the time we need to be surging," says Edwards' top adviser, Joe Trippi, who said his candidate's gains have largely been drawn from Obama.

Redlawski says recent polls show Edwards gaining an edge over Obama among Iowa's crucial "second-choice" voters - Democrats who switch candidates after the first round of balloting in the caucuses.

Not surprisingly, Edwards and Obama are rediscovering their mutual animosity after a year of ganging up on Clinton. Obama has even begun attacking Edwards as unelectable, comparing him to his 2004 running mate, John Kerry.

"Part of the problem that John would have in the general election is that the issues that he's talking about now are not the issues or the things that he said four years ago, which always causes us problems in general elections," Obama told supporters in Keokuk on Saturday.

For weeks, the Clinton campaign has been quietly downplaying its own chances of winning, while pushing the idea that Edwards would win the caucuses.

But her pump-up-Edwards strategy goes only so far.

"If she finishes third, how can she recover?" asks Redlawski.

And that strategy can't compensate for her high negative ratings or her inability to encourage defections from Edwards and Obama.

"The people who love her aren't going to leave her, but she's also not able to move beyond her base of support," said Rachel Caufield, a politics professor at Drake University in Des Moines. "Hillary's frozen in concrete."

Edwards’ surge may pull votes from Obama

Third-place finish would hurt Clinton

Three front-runners in virtual three-way tie here and here and here.

By Glenn Thrush, Newsday, December 31, 2007

DES MOINES, Iowa (Reuters) - Democrat Hillary Clinton holds a slim lead in Iowa over Barack Obama and a rising John Edwards, who are tied for second place three days before the state opens the presidential nominating race, according to a Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll released on Monday.

In the tight Republican contest in Iowa, Mike Huckabee narrowly leads Mitt Romney, who slipped by one point to trail 29 percent to 27 percent. John McCain gained two points but remained a distant third at 13 percent.

About 6 percent of likely caucus-goers in each party remain undecided of their choice in Thursday's contest, the first big test in the state-by-state battle to choose Republican and Democratic candidates in November's presidential election.

"It's about as close as you can get at the top in both races," pollster John Zogby said. "But it's still very uncertain."

The poll of 899 likely Democratic caucus-goers and 902 likely Republican caucus-goers was taken Thursday through Saturday and has a margin of error of 3.3 percentage points for each party.

Most of the top candidates in both parties have been crisscrossing Iowa for days in a late hunt for support that could give them an edge and momentum for later contests.

The poll showed Clinton, a New York senator and former first lady, leading Edwards and Illinois Sen. Obama by four points, 30 percent to 26 percent. Edwards, a former North Carolina senator, gained two points overnight to pull even with Obama.

Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson were at 5 percent. Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd and Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich were at 1 percent.

GOOD DAY FOR EDWARDS

"Edwards had a good day by virtue especially of increasing support among independent voters," Zogby said. Edwards led narrowly among independents over Clinton and Obama.

The poll found Clinton's supporters remained the most dedicated with 73 percent saying their support was "very" strong, compared to 66 percent for Edwards and 63 percent for Obama.

Under Iowa's arcane caucus rules, candidates must receive support from 15 percent of the participants in each precinct to be viable. If not, their supporters can switch to other candidates.

Edwards was the most popular second choice with 28 percent, while Obama had 25 percent and Clinton 14 percent.

In the Republican race, Huckabee held on to his slim two-point lead despite an Iowa ad campaign from Romney attacking Huckabee's record as governor of Arkansas.

McCain solidified his hold on third with his two-point gain to 13 percent. Three Republicans battled for fourth, with former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson at 8 percent and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Texas Rep. Ron Paul at 7 percent.

A third-place finish for McCain, an Arizona senator who has largely bypassed Iowa to concentrate on the next contest in New Hampshire, would give him a small measure of momentum going into that state's January 8 primary.

Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, has been running hard in both Iowa and New Hampshire. His top rivals in each state have concentrated on just one -- Huckabee in Iowa and McCain in New Hampshire.

"The only real movement for Republicans was with McCain," Zogby said. "If he continues to climb it could hurt Romney because he is pulling support from independents, moderates and others who are essential to Romney's support."

The rolling tracking poll will continue each day through the Iowa caucus on Thursday. In a rolling poll, the most recent day's results are added while the oldest day's results are dropped in order to track changing momentum.

By John Whitesides, Reuters, December 31, 2007

Americans will cast their first votes this week in the 2008 battle for the White House.

The results in the state of Iowa could have a significant effect on the neck-and-neck contests for both Republican and Democratic nominations.

In the Democratic fight, Senator Hillary Clinton has a four-point lead - described as "statistically insignificant" by pollsters - over Barack Obama, with Senator John Edwards just three points further behind.

On the Republican side, there is a "battle of the Bible-bashers" between Mike Huckabee, the guitarplaying Baptist minister and former Arkansas governor, who is a single point ahead of Mitt Romney, the Mormon former governor of Massachusetts.

Thursday's Iowa caucuses - votes among the party faithful that are similar to the primaries held by most other states - have been the first major test on the path to presidential nomination since 1972.

A win there can give candidates vital momentum for later state votes.

The Democrat contest centres on the candidate who would be America's first woman president and the man who would be the first black in the White House.

Mrs Clinton leads Mr Obama among women and older voters, who are the most likely to turn out.

Mr Obama has a big lead among younger voters, but they are considered less reliable.

The wild card for Mrs Clinton is her ever-popular husband, former President Bill Clinton, who has been campaigning for her.

She said this week: "He will not have a formal, official role, but just as presidents rely on wives, husbands, fathers, friends of long years, he will be my close confidant and adviser as I was with him."

The Republican race has already taken a sour turn, with Mr Huckabee slamming TV "attack ads" from the Romney camp criticising him for being weak on immigration and crime, foreign policy and taxation.

Mr Huckabee accused Romney of running "a very desperate and, frankly, distorted" campaign against himself and another candidate, John McCain.

He told a TV chat show: "If I believed half the stuff Mitt's saying about me, I wouldn't vote for myself."

McCain, asked if Romney was a "phoney," declined to use the exact word but said: "I think he's a person who changed his positions on many issues."

Romney is fighting hard in both Iowa and New Hampshire, where there is a primary next week.

He believes victories in both would vault him to the nomination, but his campaign team are worried that he is widely seen as too calculating.

By Barry Wigmore, Daily Mail, December 30, 2007

CLINTON, Iowa - On the final weekend before Iowa's presidential caucuses, the Democratic contenders tangled over electability Saturday as the leading Republican candidates delivered fresh attacks on their rivals, hoping to nudge undecided voters to reach a decision in an extraordinarily volatile campaign.

"Who is tested and ready to be the winning candidate for the Democratic Party?" said Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, arguing her ability to fend off Republicans. "They've been after me for 16 years. And much to their dismay, I'm still here."

Senator Barack Obama of Illinois took the rare step of mentioning his leading rivals by name. He pointedly told voters he believed that Mrs. Clinton would "start off with half the country not wanting to vote for her."

Asked about Mr. Obama's comments, Mrs. Clinton named Democrats supporting her, including Gov. Ted Strickland of Ohio, who traveled with her Saturday. "They are not on a political suicide mission," she said.

But it was the new rhetoric on the Republican side of the ticket that drew the fiercest spark, as former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas hurled a barrage of attacks at the credibility of his chief rival here, former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts.

"If a person is dishonest in his approach to get the job, do you believe he will be honest in telling you the truth when he does get the job?" Mr. Huckabee asked voters in Osceola, Iowa.

Mr. Huckabee said he was escalating his criticism in part because of Mr. Romney's recent disparagements of a third Republican rival, Senator John McCain of Arizona, whom Mr. Huckabee called "an American hero."

"It is enough to attack me," Mr. Huckabee said. "But now to attack John McCain, it is like Mitt doesn't have anything to stand on except to stand against. And I am saying enough is enough."

Three Republican candidates - Mr. Huckabee, Mr. Romney and Mr. McCain - are fighting for primacy here and in the New Hampshire primary, which takes place on Jan. 8, five days after the Iowa caucuses on Thursday. (On Saturday, The Concord Monitor in New Hampshire announced that it was endorsing Mrs. Clinton and Mr. McCain.) For his part, Mr. Romney did not mention Mr. Huckabee on the second day of a bus tour across the state.

In their closing tours of rural eastern Iowa counties, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Obama and former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina largely mimicked one another's travel patterns, each hoping to have the final word with undecided voters.

Locked in a competitive three-way fight, their messages also showed similarities. Mr. Edwards vowed Saturday to ban former lobbyists from being employed in the White House; Mr. Obama announced a similar proposal earlier.

Still, by contrast, the Democratic candidates on Saturday engaged in far more polite campaigning, hoping to end a bruising yearlong contest on a positive note.

While the Republican campaign here has often appeared sleepy, with several candidates focusing their efforts elsewhere, several candidates began broadcasting their final commercials, and new criticism emerged from Mr. Huckabee, who had pledged to maintain a positive tone in the campaign.

Mr. Huckabee accused Mr. Romney of fabricating elements of his personal history, alluding to an exaggeration that Mr. Romney made about his past as a hunter. "You are not going to hear me making up stuff about my biography," Mr. Huckabee said. "I don't go around saying I was a lifelong golfer because I once rode in a golf cart when I was 8 years old."

"You aren't going to hear me talk about how I once was a person who was on the other side of the issue when it came to the Reagan-Bush legacy and didn't believe in it, was an independent, but now I love Ronald Reagan," Mr. Huckabee continued, alluding to Mr. Romney's declaration during the 1994 Senate race in Massachusetts that he was not a Reagan Republican. "I voted for Ronald Reagan when Reagan first ran for office."

In response, Kevin Madden, a spokesman for Mr. Romney, said in a statement that his campaign had been calling attention to "substantive and relevant differences that Governor Romney has with Mike Huckabee on big issues," including taxes and spending policies.

After enduring weeks of criticism from Mr. Romney for granting clemency to a prisoner who committed new crimes after his release, Mr. Huckabee accused him of refusing worthy pardons for political expediency. Mr. Huckabee told the story of a decorated Iraq war veteran, Anthony Circosta, who could not get a job as a police officer because of a blot on his record for harmlessly shooting another boy with a BB gun at age 13.

"He was in Mitt Romney's state," Mr. Huckabee said, "and Mitt Romney twice said no because Mitt Romney wants to brag that he never ever gave a pardon. I wouldn't be bragging about not giving a decorated soldier a chance to become a police officer."

By Jeff Zeleny and David D. Kirkpatrick, The New York Times, December 30, 2007

Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton has picked up the backing of Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington, the 10th Senate endorsement Clinton has received in her presidential bid.

The campaign was set to announce Cantwell's endorsement Monday.

"Hillary is ready to address our energy challenges on day one with a bold, comprehensive plan to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and move America toward a renewable energy future," Cantwell said in a statement.

In the closing days before Iowa's caucuses Thursday, Clinton has been addressing questions about her electability in the general election - in part by touting endorsements from leading elected officials.

Campaigning with Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland on Saturday, Clinton said he and other high-profile backers aren't on a "political suicide mission" and are supporting her because they believe she can win Republican-leaning states.

The caucuses are anything but a Norman Rockwell exercise in small-town democracy.

The trouble with the Iowa caucuses isn't that there's anything wrong with Iowans. It's the bizarre rules of the process. Caucuses are touted as authentic neighborhood meetings where voters gather in their precincts and make democracy come alive. In truth, they are anything but.

Caucuses occur only at a fixed time at night, so that many people working odd hours can't participate. They can easily exceed two hours. There are no absentee ballots, which means the process disfranchises the sick, shut-ins and people who are out of town on the day of the caucus. The Democratic caucuses require participants to stand in a corner with other supporters of their candidate. That eliminates the secret ballot.

There are reasons for all this. The caucuses are run by the state parties, and unlike primary or general elections aren't regulated by the government. They were designed as an insiders' game to attract party activists, donors and political junkies and give them a disproportionate influence in the process. In other words, they are designed not to be overly democratic. Primaries aren't perfect. but at least they make it fairly easy for everyone to vote, since polls are open all day and it takes only a few minutes to cast a ballot.

Little wonder that voter turnout for the Iowa caucuses is extremely low--in recent years about 6% of registered voters. Many potential voters will proclaim their civic virtue to pollsters and others and say they will show up at the caucus--and then find something else to do Thursday night.

All of which means that the endless polls on the Iowa caucuses are highly suspect. Iowans have been bombarded by well over a million political phone calls in recent days. They range from "robo calls" from interest groups touting one candidate or another to breathless teenage volunteers inviting the voter to a local coffee with some obscure relative of a candidate.

Smart voters tune all this out and screen their calls, making it difficult for pollsters to reach them. Even when they do answer the phone, many people refuse to participate in surveys. Pollsters can't call people who only have cell phones. So you get implausible results like last Friday's Los Angeles Times survey that found Barack Obama in third place on the Democratic side and Mike Huckabee running away with the GOP contest. The Times's pollsters surveyed just 174 likely Republican voters and 389 Democratic one, with a whopping margin of error of plus or minus seven percentage points among Republicans and five points among Democrats.

Iowa voters' allegiances are notoriously volatile. A new Associated Press poll of a large sample of voters estimates that 40% of GOP voters had changed candidate allegiances since November. In 2004, polls a few days before the caucuses suggested suggested Howard Dean would be a shoo-in. He finished a distant third, behind John Kerry and John Edwards.

Then there are the problems of reporting the results on election night. At least the Republican caucus is a one-man, one-vote affair where people write their preferred candidate's name on a slip of paper, and whoever gets the most votes wins.

Democrats have a mind-numbingly complex system in which participants divide up into "candidate preference groups" by standing up. No paper ballots are used. Those candidates who don't get support from 15% or more of those attending a local caucus are deemed not to be "viable," and their supporters have to realign with some other candidate.

"That's when it gets kind of crazy," says Mark Daley, a former spokesman for the Iowa Democratic Party. "There will be people screaming back and forth . . . and senior citizens with calculators trying to do the math." Only after all this are county convention delegates allocated among the candidates and the results phoned in to the state Democratic Party. Delegates aren't actually allocated until the Democratic county conventions in March.

Not all local caucuses are equal. The "entrance" polls of voter preferences that you will see reported Thursday night are likely to be from urban areas, which may shortchange candidates like John Edwards, Mike Huckabee and Fred Thompson, who have campaigned more heavily in rural areas. "It's entirely possible that John Edwards could come in a stunning second when all the votes are in, but the country will have gone to bed thinking he only took third place," says Howard Fineman of Newsweek.

Rural Iowa matters for another reason in the Democratic contest. In order to encourage candidates to campaign in farming areas, state Democrats have tilted the delegate allocation so that rural areas are disproportionately represented in the final results. This sometimes can lead to bizarre results. As Roger Simon of Politico.com notes, "the turnout in some precincts is so small that a single family--let's say four people--can determine the winner. In other precincts, only one person will show up and win for his candidate by being the only person in the room." In small-turnout caucus meetings, ties are resolved by a coin toss or drawing lots. In 2004, four precincts saw literally no one show up to vote in the Democratic caucus.

There are other anomalies on the Democratic side. Some precincts use a different threshold level than 15% for the viability of a candidate. "Residency" rules are incredibly elastic. No one checks identification, and anyone who claims to live in the precinct is allowed to vote. In other words, very little prevents the unscrupulous (such as out-of-state campaign workers who have "lived" in Iowa for a few weeks) from having a role in the process. Each caucus also elects a "permanent chair," who can have an outsize role in the process. Ned Chiodo, who has been appointed temporary chair of his local caucus by the state Democratic Party, told Politico.com that a permanent chair "controls the flow of the meeting. You have influence. You may be able to pick up a vote or two here and there for your candidate."

All of these arcane rules, combined with the fixed time and place voters mush show up in order to influence the result, make the Iowa caucus a test of organization as much as actual voter support. "The candidate that provides the most babysitters or literally drives older people to the polls the most can have a real edge," Tom Tauke, a Republican former congressman, once told me.

Thus the Iowa caucuses are far from a Normal Rockwell exercise in small-town democracy. They may not be as bad as the "smoke-filled rooms" of yore, but give me a simple primary election any day. I can't wait for New Hampshire.





By John Fund, The Wall Street Journal, December 31, 2007

VINTON, Iowa - It's one thing for Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign to turn down interview requests for the candidate's daughter, Chelsea. But can't a 9-year-old reporter catch a break?

Sydney Rieckhoff, a Cedar Rapids fourth grader and "kid reporter" for Scholastic News, has posed questions to seven Republican and Democratic presidential hopefuls as they've campaigned across Iowa this year. But when she approached the 27-year-old Chelsea after a campaign event Sunday, she got a different response.

"Do you think your dad would be a good 'first man' in the White House?" Sydney asked, but Chelsea brushed her question aside.

"I'm sorry, I don't talk to the press and that applies to you, unfortunately. Even though I think you're cute," Chelsea told the pint-sized journalist.

Such is the paradox of Chelsea as she campaigns across Iowa in the closing days before the state's caucuses Jan. 3.

Tall and attractive, Chelsea cuts an impressive figure on the campaign trail; she plunges enthusiastically into the crowd after her mother's speeches, shaking hands and posing for pictures while asking, "Are you going to caucus for my mom?"

But onstage, Chelsea never speaks; she stands next to her mother and applauds but utters not a single sentence and doesn't even say hello. And reporters covering the campaign have been put on notice that Chelsea is not available to speak to them. An aide follows the former first daughter as she works the crowd, shushing reporters who approach her and try to ask any questions.

Famously protective of their daughter's privacy, Bill and Hillary Clinton have taken pains to shield Chelsea from the harsh glare and rough edges of presidential politics. She stayed largely absent from her mother's campaign until December, when she made her first visit to Iowa.

For her part, Sydney looked a bit crestfallen after Chelsea turned her away. But luckily for Hillary Clinton, Sydney's mother has made up her mind to caucus for the former first lady.

"I like her position on family values and health care. And I think it's time we have a female president," Robyn Rieckhoff said.

By Beth Fouhy, Associated Press, December 30, 2007

DES MOINES - Senator Barack Obama is on the hunt for Iowans who have never participated in the state's presidential caucuses, including independent voters under 50 and students who will be 18 by the general election.

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is searching for Iowans who have skipped the caucuses in the past and who, because of age, sex or other characteristics, seem likely to support her, starting with independent women over 65 or under 30.

John Edwards is taking a more traditional approach, working through the official list of Democrats who showed up to choose a candidate in 2004, as his campaign tries to ensure that it has the name of every likely voter who might be on his side when Iowans gather in 1,781 precinct caucuses across the state on Thursday night.

The ground war - the laborious, unglamorous process of identifying supporters and making sure they show up to make their preference known when it counts - has always been a critical part of the contest in Iowa. But the turnout effort among Democrats this time around has exploded into the most ambitious and costly in the history of this state's presidential caucus system, and it puts on display the sharply diverging strategies the candidates are pursuing as they hurtle toward the first real test of the 2008 campaign.

Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama are trying to expand the tiny universe of caucusgoers, a fundamental shift in the way candidates have approached the Iowa caucuses. Mr. Edwards is focusing mainly on voters who have reliably voted in the past.

The developments reflect the tightness of the race - another poll Friday found Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Edwards and Mr. Obama effectively tied - and the dynamics of an unusual contest where so few people vote: about 125,000 in the Democratic caucus of 2004. Aides to the candidates said this contest could be determined by a swing of as few as 1,000 voters.

"I've never seen anything like it," Gov. Chet Culver, a Democrat who has not endorsed anyone in the race, said in an interview in his office on Friday. "The get-out-the-vote efforts are going to be the best ever."

On the Republican side, Mitt Romney is also making an intense effort to turn out his supporters to stave off Mike Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor who polls suggest has made a late surge that gives him a chance of victory. Mr. Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, has spent more than a year building a turnout organization that proved its effectiveness at the Iowa Straw Poll in Ames this summer and that he is now counting on to turn back a stiff challenge from Mr. Huckabee, who is relying largely on word-of-mouth and a network of volunteers, his aides said.

Many of the other Republican candidates are making only token efforts here. So most of the on-the-ground organizing is being done by the leading Democrats, and that was becoming increasingly visible as the candidates and their supporters fanned out across the state this weekend.

Mrs. Clinton's office here is filled with hundreds of new green snow shovels that were being strategically distributed on Saturday to precinct captains to clear the walks of older women who might be particularly wary of going out to the caucuses in bad weather. The campaign has printed doorknob hangers with caucus locations printed in extra-large type, also to accommodate these older first-time caucusers.

"We have had a significant challenge here in that our people are older and mostly new," said Karen Hicks, a senior campaign adviser for Mrs. Clinton. "But we've understood what our challenges were for a long time. This is not a problem you could have dealt with at the last moment."

Mrs. Clinton's campaign has contracted with a local supermarket chain to deliver platters of sandwiches for pre-caucus parties at caucus sites late Thursday afternoon. The idea is to entice people to arrive early and thus give Clinton aides time to see who has not shown up and get them to the caucus before the doors close at 7 p.m.

This city is teeming with Democratic strategists who are renowned in their party for knowing how to organize the caucuses or use sophisticated computer models and consumer data to find people who might not otherwise vote but could be open to backing particular candidates.

Mrs. Clinton is banking on Teresa Vilmain, who has worked in Iowa presidential caucuses for over 20 years, and Ms. Hicks, a former national field director for the Democratic National Committee. Mr. Obama and Mr. Edwards have similarly respected operatives running their caucus operation, including David Plouffe and Steve Hildebrand for Mr. Obama. Jennifer O'Malley Dillon is running Mr. Edwards's Iowa campaign for a second time.

Mrs. Clinton, of New York, and Mr. Obama, of Illinois, are betting that they can use computer-driven research to expand the relatively small pool of caucusgoers. But all the Democrats have built large staffs, with members knocking on doors, making phone calls and keeping detailed records of which Iowans have pledged their support and which might be open to persuasion.

Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama, in particular, are spending lavishly on door-to-door canvassers, repeated and often elaborate mailings and novelty items to help hook potential supporters. The Clinton campaign has mailed refrigerator magnets marked with the caucus date to the women they have identified as first-time caucusgoers who might determine her fate. Mr. Obama has promised baby-sitting to any parent who needs it caucus night.

"It is definitely the most highly organized caucus of all time," said Michael Whouley, a veteran Iowa caucus organizer, who is supporting Mrs. Clinton but is one of the few major Democratic strategists who have not come to Iowa for this fight.

As part of their effort to find first-time caucusgoers, the Clinton and the Obama campaigns have brought to Iowa the type of sophisticated voter identification models, using detailed demographic and consumer data, employed by the Republican National Committee beginning in 2002. Starting in the summer, the campaigns used that data to find Iowans who had not caucused before and who might be inclined to support their candidate.

It was that kind of research that led Mrs. Clinton to determine, for example, that women over 65 were inclined to support her, in particular widows or married women, but only those married to a Democrat or independent. Using that model and state election records, they searched for Iowans who had voted in regular elections but had not caucused. Mr. Obama did much the same thing with, for example, independent voters under 50.

They dispatched canvassers to make multiple personal visits to the homes of those people, a decision reflecting the determination by both campaigns that Iowa voters have been so deluged with telephone calls that they could not rely on telephone banks typically used. Because research conducted by her campaign found that many Iowans who supported Mrs. Clinton but had never caucused before found the process intimidating or baffling, her aides showed up at the homes of those voters with DVD's that explained how the caucuses work.

"It's always hard to expand the base," Mr. Culver said. "But if there was ever a year when we could have another 20,000 people turn up, this is it."

At the Edwards headquarters, Ms. Dillon said she doubted there would be a significant increase in voters. She expressed skepticism that her rivals' expenditures on mailings, gifts and personal contacts would bear fruit. "Iowa voters are not going to say, 'Oh my God! I got a bumper sticker. I should caucus!' " she said.

The intensity of the effort is fueled by the decisions of Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama to decline public campaign financing. They are thus not constrained by the spending ceilings of the campaign finance system that restrict Mr. Edwards, of North Carolina, who is using public money.

Mrs. Clinton's campaign, in the first mailing to first-time caucusgoers who pledge to support her, includes porcelain lapel pins identifying them as Clinton supporters. Mrs. Clinton looks for women wearing those pins at her events and praises them for caucusing for the first time.

Mr. Obama is focusing on younger voters, who have brought considerable energy to his campaign but who as a group have not tended to turn out to vote in large numbers in past presidential elections. As supporters walk into a campaign stop for Mr. Obama, separate lines are designated for high school and college students to receive specific instructions for caucus night. After his speech, he holds a brief meeting and photograph session with his young supporters who belong to a program called Barack Stars.

Obama supporters of all ages receive a yellow slip of paper - a "Ticket to Change" - with directions to their caucus site and a telephone hot line (one for each of Iowa's five area codes) to answer questions.

To expand the universe of caucus participants, the Obama campaign hired Ken Strasma, one of the leading Democratic specialists in finding voters through microtargeting. Maps of Mr. Strasma's efforts hang throughout the campaign's state headquarters on Locust Street here, color-coded with shades of prospective pockets of supporters

To find its supporters, the Obama campaign spent months developing models of who their likely supporters would be, focusing particularly on previous caucus voters as well as Iowans who voted in the 2006 governor's race but had never caucused. Months ago, strategists saw one of the biggest areas of potential supporters to be independent voters under 50, as well as men registered as Democrats.

"What's the one thing that will determine this election? The campaign that does the best job of turning out the highest percentage of their supporters," said Mr. Plouffe, the campaign manager for Mr. Obama. "We're maniacally focused on that."

By Adam Nagourney and Jeff Zeleny, The New York Times, December 30, 2007

BOTTOM OF PACK IN HAWKEYE STATE

WEST DES MOINES, Iowa - Rudy Giuliani's support here has plummeted into the single digits, far lower than the frigid winter temperatures in the Hawkeye State, according to new surveys released yesterday.

A Reuters poll shows the Republican ex-mayor capturing just 8 percent of the vote - tied for fourth place with Fred Thompson and anti-war candidate Ron Paul.

And an MSNBC poll shows Giuliani tied with Paul for fifth place with a measly 5 percent of the vote - near the bottom of the pack.

Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee are running neck and neck for first.

The icy numbers come a day after Giuliani spent his final day stumping in Iowa before the Jan. 3 caucus. He was in New Hampshire yesterday, which holds its primary on Jan. 8.

Giuliani's support has fallen by half in Iowa over the past month.

"American's mayor is getting Ron Paul-like numbers! Where has he been? He stopped showing up," said conservative activist Jamie Johnson, who runs a radio station.

Giuliani did not air a single TV ad in Iowa, and his 15 trips here were far fewer than front-runners Romney and Huckabee.

Instead, he has focused on winning Florida on Jan. 28 and more than 20 delegate-rich states on Feb. 5, including New York.

Giuliani defended the strategy yesterday and brushed off questions about his slide in the polls.

"When you get to Florida and the Feb. 5 states, we're ahead in some cases by large percentages and in some case by closer percentages," Giuliani told Fox News. "We believe it's a good strategy and it's going to work."

New York's favorite daughter, Hillary Rodham Clinton, is faring far better, though she is locked in a tight race with Barack Obama and John Edwards.

She spoke yesterday at Corinthian Baptist Church, a mostly black congregation that Obama addressed recently.

Clinton came 30 minutes late with a big entourage and left through a side door before the sermon - and got chastised by the deacon during his sermon.

"When I first got here, I was a little overwhelmed by all the dignitaries," said the Rev. Elder James Green after Clinton had left. "I thought they were going to stay for service."

"I did, too," yelled out a worshiper.

The deacon then led the church in the refrain: "Lord, fix my heart, fix my mind . . . I don't want to run the race in vain."

Clinton later told a crowd of a few hundred in suburban Traer to "look at the evidence" when making their decision on whom to back Thursday.

"When the cameras are off and there isn't anybody around, I'm still trying to figure out how to help people," she said.

Meanwhile, John McCain - who like Giuliani has largely written off winning Iowa - is rising here, getting 13 percent in both polls.

By Carl Campanle and Geoff Earle, New York Post, December 31, 2007

While the Democratic race has often, and quite accurately, been described as a choice between change (Barack Obama and John Edwards) and experience (Hillary Rodham Clinton), it has, in the final days before Iowa, become another kind of choice as well.

Democrats must decide whether they want a candidate who is angry and confrontational, and who sees those favoring compromise as traitors (Edwards), or a candidate who presents himself as a uniter (Obama), or a candidate who presents herself as someone who understands the ways of Washington and can get things done (Clinton).

While Clinton and Obama both acknowledge the importance of working with various interests, including Capitol Hill Republicans and the business community, to come up with solutions to key problems, Edwards sounds more and more like the neighborhood bully who plans to dictate what is to be done.

The former North Carolina senator is running a classic populist campaign that would have made William Jennings Bryan (or Ralph Nader) proud. Everything is Corporate America's fault. But he's also portraying himself as fighting for the middle class and able to appeal to swing voters and even Republicans in a general election.

Edwards certainly would dispute that there is an inherent contradiction between his populist rhetoric and his alleged middle class appeal. But his approach to problems is likely to frighten many voters, including most middle class Americans and virtually all Republicans.

For months, observers have noted that Americans are tired of the polarization and gridlock that has defined Washington, D.C. at least since 1994 (except for a brief period following September 11th). But if Iowa Democrats choose Edwards, they are choosing anger, confrontation and class warfare. In a sense, they are displaying buyer's remorse (from 2004) and choosing a more attractive, charismatic Howard Dean-like candidate this time.

Ironically, Edwards criticized Dean for being too angry in 2004, yet this time the former North Carolina Democrat has adopted Dean's confrontational style.

Edwards portrays himself as a fighter for the middle class, but his message is decidedly working class and left. The North Carolina Democrat's message seems well-suited for 1933 or 1934, but not nearly as ideal for 2008. Yet, Iowa Democrats, like many of their partisan colleagues around the country, are so angry at President George W. Bush that they might be willing to give voice to their anger by voting for Edwards at the caucuses.

Four years ago, angry anti-war candidate Dean drew 18 percent of caucus-goers, while populist Dick Gephardt drew another 11 percent. Edwards, himself, attracted 32 percent of 2004 Iowa Democratic caucus attendees.

But let's be very clear: Given the North Carolina Democrat's rhetoric and agenda, an Edwards Presidency would likely rip the nation apart - even further apart than Bush has torn it.

On Capitol Hill, Edwards's "us versus them" rhetoric and legislative agenda would almost certainly make an already bitter mood even worse. He would in the blink of an eye unify the GOP and open up divisions in his own party's ranks. Congressional Republicans would circle the wagons in an effort to stop Edwards's agenda.

Would Clinton or Obama fare better in the nation's capital? It's hard to tell, but the answer probably is "yes."

Obama surely wouldn't arouse the immediate resentment and opposition that Edwards would, giving the Illinois senator a far better chance of accomplishing important things during the first two years of his term.

And while many Republicans around the country revile anyone named Clinton, the New York Senator might not face as much hostility as some assume from Capitol Hill Republicans. After all, Senator Clinton has worked well with her colleagues from both parties, and she knows better than anyone how important it is to build successful bipartisan coalitions on Capitol Hill.

Just as important, a President Edwards might well find that his view of the American economy is built on sand. For while Edwards bashes corporate America and "them," this nation's economy depends on the success of both small business and big business.

Scare the stuffing out of Corporate America and watch the stock market tumble. That's certain to make retirement funds - including those owned by labor unions and "working families" - happy, right? Stick it to Wal-Mart, and their 1.8 million employees are at risk. Beat up on IBM, and you are beating up on their 330,000 employees. Take a pound of flesh from General Electric, Citigroup, Home Depot and United Technologies, and you've put the squeeze on just under 1.2 million employees.

So, Iowa Democrats are faced with much more than a choice of change versus readiness for the job. They will be deciding what kind of party and what kind of country they want. And they will be making an important statement about the tone they want in Washington, D.C.

The question facing Iowa Democrats is whether they want to send a message of frustration, or whether they place a higher priority on getting things accomplished in 2009. Edwards's bet is that, unlike 2004, they'll choose anger and confrontation.

By Stuart Rothenberg, Real Clear Politics, December 31, 2007

RENO, Nev. (AP) - While Democrats Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama camped out in Iowa, their supporters worked behind the scenes across Nevada over the weekend.

Hundreds of Clinton volunteers hit the pavement and knocked on doors to encourage Nevadans to caucus for the New York senator.

Obama supporters held Women for Barack Obama house parties to drum up support for the Illinois senator in advance of the state's Jan. 19 presidential caucuses.

Obama supporters simultaneously gathered in Las Vegas, Reno, Carson City, Elko and Pahrump to meet with undecided caucus-goers.

Maya Soetoro-Ng, Obama's sister, called the parties to discuss the important role that women will play in the caucuses.

Clinton supporters fanned out to neighborhoods across Nevada.

"With less than a month to the caucus, the campaign is working hard to galvanize support for Hillary and make certain that all Nevadans make their voices heard by participating on January 19," said Rory Reid, Clinton's Nevada chair.

Nevada's caucuses will be the fourth test for Democratic presidential candidates, although they have promised not to campaign in the third state, Michigan.

A poll conducted Dec. 3-5 for the Las Vegas Review-Journal found Clinton favored by 34 percent of likely caucus-goers to Obama's 26 percent.

No other Democrat registered in double digits in the poll. Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards got 9 percent, while New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson had 7 percent.

The poll of 625 registered voters had a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

Las Vegas Sun, December 30, 2007

Volunteers don't mind traveling in support of their candidates

DES MOINES, Iowa - Audacious as it seemed, Brett Rosenthal figured it couldn't hurt sending Barack Obama a letter after reading the presidential candidate's best-selling treatise on civic participation, The Audacity of Hope.

"I'm seeking your advice and direction so that my energy can best be used in advancing our shared vision of a gentler, fairer, stronger America. You chose to begin making your improvements to the world as a community organizer," wrote Mr. Rosenthal, a 22-year-old Irving resident, then a senior at Yale University. "Where do you suggest I begin?"

Six weeks later, an answer arrived in a voicemail message.

"Hey, Brett, this is Barack Obama. I just wanted to say I read your letter, and I was very impressed," Mr. Rosenthal recalls the Democratic senator from Illinois saying. "I hope we can get a chance to meet someday. Think about volunteering for me."

Someday arrived in May.

After first volunteering for Mr. Obama, Mr. Rosenthal became a campaign letter-writer, and not long thereafter, the campaign's get-out-the-caucus coordinator for Iowa's southern region. Since spring, the two men have crossed paths nearly 20 times.

Unique as his story is, Mr. Rosenthal is hardly the only Texan to find his way to the snowy plains of Iowa, each one by a seemingly different route.

But given the Iowa caucuses' significance - strong finishes in this first national contest to determine parties' convention delegates often ignite campaigns as much as weak finishes sink them - the Texas transplants each said they couldn't wait to battle on their presidential hopeful's behalf.

Such is especially true for Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson, who traveled from Austin last week to campaign for former Sen. Fred Thompson, R-Tenn. Texas' presidential primary is March 4, and by then, Mr. Patterson laments, a wealthier candidate with a larger campaign organization may have all but secured the GOP nomination. "So we're here to help Texas be in the mix by keeping Fred in the mix," Mr. Patterson said from Mr. Thompson's Urbandale, Iowa, headquarters, as Houstonites Michael Barker and Steve Munisteri nodded in agreement after a long day calling prospective caucus-goers. "The world is run by those who show up, and if you don't show up and get through Iowa, you're in trouble in the other states," said Mr. Barker, who along with Mr. Patterson was instrumental in persuading Mr. Thompson to run for president.

Facing the jury

Former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina never needed much convincing in his quest to win the presidency. But with Mr. Obama and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton flush with campaign cash, Mr. Edwards desperately needed contributions to fuel his second attempt for the White House.

Enter Dallasite and fellow trial-lawyer-by-trade Fred Baron, who has pingponged around the country for the past year as Mr. Edwards' national finance chairman, landing in Des Moines yet again last week. The money Mr. Baron helped raise here funds a robust campaign operation and plenty of advertisements, which have contributed to Mr. Edwards' strong showing in Iowa polls recently.

"It's very different here because Iowans view themselves not so much as voters but as jurors of the candidates. They want to meet them, hear from them," said Mr. Baron, a native of Cedar Rapids, Iowa.

"Texas voters, because we don't have a primary within the real window of influence, have to get most of their information from the press, and that puts them at a disadvantage."

While Mr. Baron expected months ago he'd now be in Iowa, Coppell resident Kristin Dulin didn't have a clue she'd be in the Hawkeye State, too.

Then she attended a speech by former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee in Dallas. It moved her so much that she took an unpaid leave of absence from her job at a construction company to volunteer with his campaign.

Soon after, the campaign asked Ms. Dulin and her sister Kassie to travel to Iowa after Thanksgiving, just as Mr. Huckabee's fortunes in the GOP nomination process began to soar.

Ms. Dulin works up to 16 hours a day coordinating volunteers and handling logistics at Mr. Huckabee's Iowa headquarters. When Mr. Huckabee needed a trustworthy aide to file documents in Springfield, Ill., to appear on that state's ballot, Ms. Dulin was among the staffers who drove overnight through a snowstorm to accomplish the task.

"I never, ever expected to be doing campaign work," Ms. Dulin said. "But I never expected to meet a candidate like Gov. Huckabee."

Austin resident John Oeffinger expected to campaign for his candidate of choice, Mrs. Clinton – just maybe not door to door along the streets of Marshalltown, Iowa, where he has been working most days since Christmas.

"For a Texas boy to be driving in snow and ice is a fascinating experience," said the 55-year-old e-learning company manager, who had never before been to Iowa. "But in these final stages, it's about dotting your I's and crossing your T's. You've got to work."

Even if the prospects of one's work paying prized dividends is bleak.

Getting the word out

Despite Delaware Sen. Joe Biden's low poll numbers, Dallas resident Michael Bell and his wife, Susan, arrived in Iowa on Saturday to make phone calls for a Democrat in whom he has "complete faith when he says something, and we're doing all we can to make sure people know it."

And although New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, another Democrat, struggles to compete against Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Edwards and Mr. Obama, he's looking good doing it thanks to campaign videographer Ashleigh Hendricks, a 22-year-old Grand Prairie resident and recent Southern Methodist University graduate.

Ms. Hendricks says that although Mr. Richardson's anti-war, pro-education campaign mantra earned her support, the images she has seen through her black video camera with a Richardson sticker stuck on its viewing screen made her a believer in the man himself. "You see him at the state fair flipping pork burgers, shaking hands, looking at the butter cow - and you watch all the people who just run up and hug him," Ms. Hendricks said. "He's genuine. He's fun-loving. He's real. His poll numbers just make me work harder because any video I capture of him can that much more show people what kind of candidate he is."

Clad in headphones, Ms. Hendricks captured plenty of such moments Sunday in Des Moines, as Mr. Richardson worked a crowd 300 people strong, U2's "Where the Streets Have No Name" pumping through the room's loudspeakers.

It's the kind of moment that energizes most any campaign worker - the road-weary, the homesick, the thin-blooded Texan in a puffy overcoat chafing at forecasts of sub-zero temperatures.

"I used to think I wanted to be the quarterback of the Dallas Cowboys. Now there's no place I'd rather be than here in Iowa," Mr. Rosenthal said.

Reminded that Cowboys quarterback Tony Romo has led his team to one of the most successful seasons in franchise history, not to mention in one year dated singers Carrie Underwood and Jessica Simpson, Mr. Rosenthal paused.

"That would definitely be a nice perk - a really nice perk," he finally said. "But I think I'd still rather be working with Barack."

By David Levinthal, The Dallas Morning News, December 31, 2007

DES MOINES - Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's appearances are not billed as anything so conventional as mere "rallies" or "town meetings" or "speeches."

In the last 10 days, Mrs. Clinton has presided over "Moms and Daughters Making History" events, "Time to Pick a President" events, "Working for Change, Working for You" events, "The Hillary I Know" events and "Every County Counts" events. She rarely names her chief competitors for the Democratic presidential nomination, but their presence looms.

"Some people think you can hope for change," she said at one recent event, in a jab at Senator Barack Obama of Illinois. "Some people think you can just demand it," she added, in a swipe at former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina. "I think you do it by working really, really hard," she said, before going on to catalog her resume.

As Mr. Obama, Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Edwards try - ever so politely - to eviscerate one another in the final few days before the Iowa caucuses on Thursday, the flavor and substance of their competing performances reveal a basic cultural, thematic and stylistic divide in their campaigns, their supporters and themselves.

Mr. Obama's final zigzag across Iowa is known simply as his "Stand for Change" tour. But it could just as easily be called his "I'm Not Hillary" tour. ("And Not Edwards, Either.")

His references to his rivals are constant and, by and large, thinly veiled: becoming president, he says, has not been his "long-held ambition" (as has been suspected of both Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Edwards); it is not, he says, something he has craved "since kindergarten" (a reference to the Clinton campaign's ridicule of a paper he penned, or perhaps crayoned, as a tot); the country is weary of "the same old arguments by the same old folks," he says.

And he acknowledges, sarcastically, that people say he might not be angry enough - a reference to Mr. Edwards, whose high-volume declaration of an "epic fight" against "entrenched interests" has marked his own last dash across Iowa, also known as the "America Rising: Fighting for the Middle Class" tour.

There are similarities: they travel with big-deal entourages, vow to "stand up for you" in Washington (while urging voters to "stand for me" on Thursday night), and look very much in need of a good night's sleep, or 10.

But their distinctions are more revealing, and ultimately reflect the competing notions of change the candidates are seeking to embody.

Mrs. Clinton's variously named events reflect a candidate striving to convince voters that a host of seemingly contradictory qualities can coexist in a single candidate: that she is an utterly familiar figure who is an agent of change; that she has already lived in the White House but that her election would be historic and unprecedented; that she is someone who is tough but also likable.

Mr. Edwards's events are boisterous, if not always the most crowded. (Mr. Obama outdrew him 900 to 300 at simultaneous rallies in Davenport on Friday.) A jarringly loud rendition of John Mellencamp's "Our Country" marks his oft-tardy arrivals. He speaks less than an inch from the microphone and deploys bellicose words (22 "fights" in 40 minutes on Saturday morning), stories (about the bloody-nosed beatings he took and gave as a boy) and metaphors (voters must send "a fighter into the arena").

"I welcome their hatred," Mr. Edwards says of "entrenched interests," quoting Franklin D. Roosevelt. His crowds, heavily populated by "my brothers and sisters in organized labor," are the most likely to break into spontaneous chants. He received a long standing ovation in Davenport, begun by his wife, Elizabeth, seated behind him, while a scattering of older voters covered their ears.

Mr. Obama presents himself as the ultimate fresh face, untainted by the experience Mrs. Clinton trumpets as her prime asset. He appears out of nowhere, makes a big entrance on stage and tends to address his crowds as a singular civic unit ("Hello, Marshalltown"), like a real rock star would.

His events are slightly ragtag compared with his counterparts'. They draw younger people, many with Obama bumper stickers on their backs, as opposed to the smaller stickers placed neatly on the lapels of Mrs. Clinton's supporters. Toddlers are more likely to be seen scurrying around Obama events, sometimes breaching forbidden areas, like TV camera risers.

Mrs. Clinton's events are meticulously planned and orderly, and even seem regal at times. She stands with her hands folded at her waist while waiting to speak; she typically stands next to her daughter, Chelsea, who in recent weeks been silently accompanying her, hands folded in perfect symmetry with her mother's. While being introduced by a supporter in Guthrie Center on Thursday night, Mrs. Clinton and Chelsea were slumped shoulder-to-shoulder, holding each other up.

Mrs. Clinton, of New York, speaks farther from her audience than Mr. Obama does, but also spends more time gripping, grinning and posing afterward. Mrs. Clinton has a tendency to use the "when I'm president" construction, as opposed to "if I'm elected." She prefers the pronouns "I" and "me," whereas Mr. Obama is more prone to use "we" or "us" and Mr. Edwards "them."

In a sense, the candidates' chosen pronouns reflect their varied messages. Mrs. Clinton's "I" is a proxy for her message of experience. She is thorough in conveying her litany of accomplishments - all the things "I've worked for" - even smaller-bore issues, like helping victims of traumatic brain injuries, broadening access to mental health care and helping apple farmers in New York, one of whom, Mark Nicholson, introduced her in Guthrie Center.

Mrs. Clinton took the microphone, thanked him profusely, and praised him "for producing wonderful fruits and then expanding into juices."

People travel long distances to her rallies, as much to see a celebrity as to meet a candidate. Mrs. Clinton gets by far the most autograph and photo requests. Before her arrival, the crowd in Guthrie Center was treated to a "Hillary Trivia' game in which contestants were challenged on candidate factoids ("Where did Hillary go to college?"). Winners got a Hillary T-shirt.

Mr. Obama's "us" and "we" reflect his unity campaign, the so-called new kind of politics. His "we" constitutes a prospective coalition of anyone bent on changing the political system - as opposed to "playing the game" within it, a tacit reference to the Clintons and their political mastery.

"Instead of sending someone to Washington to play the game, we need someone to change the game plan," Mr. Obama said. "We are not a nation divided as our politics suggests."

As he drills into specifics, Mr. Obama's critique of Mrs. Clinton becomes plainer. He said deliberations on his health care legislation would not take place "in a back room," a reference to Mrs. Clinton's failed initiative in the 1990s, for which she was roundly slammed as being too secretive. He vows to invite C-Span to broadcast his health care deliberations, resulting in one of his most sustained and reliable applause lines.

Mr. Obama likes to advertise that he won "some of the reddest parts of Illinois" en route to his Senate seat, just as Mrs. Clinton invokes her successful courtship of Republican voters in upstate New York and her collaborations with Republicans in the Senate.

Mr. Edwards vows to forge a winning, bipartisan coalition united against the evil forces of "them": purveyors of "corporate greed," "Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs," and big bonus-reaping executives from "oil companies, drug companies and insurance companies."

"They have infiltrated everything," Mr. Edwards shouts, right hand clenched in a fist around his microphone. He is gifted at summoning fresh rage, despite delivering these grievances so many times. "They have an iron-fisted grip on our democracy. We must take their power away."

When Mr. Edwards's appearances turn from emotional populist themes to more weighty international matters, the rooms quiet considerably. In Davenport, Mr. Edwards took a question from a woman who praised his message but challenged him to "give me some meat" on foreign policy. As part of his answer, Mr. Edwards described a sharp phone conversation he had with President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan after Benazir Bhutto was slain.

Mr. Edwards said he urged Mr. Musharraf to "continue the process of democratization" in Pakistan, and to allow an independent investigation of Ms. Bhutto's killing.

"We also talked about the importance of the upcoming elections," Mr. Edwards said, meaning, presumably, in Pakistan, not Iowa.

By Mark Leibovich, The New York Times, December 31, 2007

DES MOINES - During an interview on Sunday on ABC's "This Week," Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton referred a few times to her shared history with her interviewer, George Stephanopoulos, who worked in the Clinton White House.

Mrs. Clinton often says that her time in the White House gave her the experience to be president. Mr. Stephanopoulos asked her on Sunday, just four days before the neck-and-neck Iowa caucuses, about a recent report in The New York Times that questioned the depth of that experience.

Mrs. Clinton said she disagreed with that conclusion and added: "You know, I can imagine what the stories would have been had I attended a National Security Council meeting. You were there. I think you can vouch for that."

Mr. Stephanopoulos was in the unusual position of being able to do just that. He managed much of the Clinton message and no doubt dreaded answering questions about the degree to which the powerful first lady might be involved in national security or anything else.

But he did not vouch for her. And there was no reaction shot of him when she said that.

At another point in the interview, Mrs. Clinton again drew him into their shared history.

Discussing the difficult campaign ahead, Mrs. Clinton recalled: "You know, George, you and I went through an experience, in 1992, where Bill Clinton didn't win anything until Georgia."

Mr. Stephanopoulos was at the Clintons' side through the searing trial by fire that was the 1992 presidential campaign. He left the White House in 1996, becoming a commentator for ABC News and writing a tell-some memoir in which he wrote of Mr. Clinton's "shamelessness" and how Mrs. Clinton would lambaste her husband while he was eating his cereal.

Despite the book, Mr. Stephanopoulos has had access to Mrs. Clinton for much of her own post-White House political career, interviewing her more than a half-dozen times.

Mr. Stephanopoulos has been an established journalist for several years now. In a brief e-mail after the show, Mr. Stephanopoulous said her references during the interview were not awkward for him. "I've reported on and interviewed Senator Clinton several times since her first Senate run, for 'This Week' and other ABC shows," he said. "She always brings her best game, and I try to do the same."

At this point, he and Mrs. Clinton seem to have a mutually beneficial relationship - she obviously has multiple ways of getting her message out, but ABC News is an important one, especially on the Sunday before the caucuses. And Mr. Stephanopoulos gets a much-sought-after interviewee.

It is also a relationship in which the tables appear to have turned.

Mr. Stephanopoulos is no longer the long-suffering aide helping to manage the Clintons' image. Now, he gets to ask Mrs. Clinton questions that he may not have been able to pose while in the White House.

He got her to say on the record that if she became president, her husband would not attend National Security Council meetings. And Mr. Clinton would "probably not" be on conference calls with the national security team dealing with an international crisis.

If he let her off the hook on at least one question - whether Senator Barack Obama was as qualified for the White House now as Mr. Clinton was in 1992 - he also asked her tough ones.

He started off by asking her about an article by Peggy Noonan, a former Reagan speechwriter, who said Mrs. Clinton is more polarizing and distrusted than even Richard Nixon.

"That's not a surprise to me, or to you," Mrs. Clinton answered, immediately drawing him back into their circle of familiarity.

8 p.m.Update: As some readers have pointed out, Mrs. Clinton did say in this interview that she did receive classified information while she was First Lady. Here is the question and the answer:

Mr. Stephanopoulos: How about in the White House? The New York Times wrote this week that you did not attend National Security Council meetings, you did not receive the president's daily briefing, didn't have a security clearance. And that calls your experience in the White House into question.

Mrs. Clinton: Well, I just disagree with that. You know, I can imagine what the stories would have been had I attended a National Security Council meeting. You were there. I think you can vouch for that.

But I had direct access to all of the decision-makers. I was briefed on a range of issues, often provided classified information. And often when I traveled on behalf of our country. I traveled with representatives from the D.O.D., the C.I.A., the State Department. I think that my experience is unique, having been eight years in the White House, having, yes, been part of making history, and also been part of learning how to best present our country’s case. And now, seven years on the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue.

By Katharine Q. Seelye, The New York Times, December 30, 2007

BOSTON - Gov. Deval Patrick and House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi put their day jobs on hold over the weekend to head out on the campaign trail -- but not for themselves.

Patrick spent much of Saturday on a bus tour of Iowa with Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama, while DiMasi stayed closer to home, attending rallies in New Hampshire on Sunday for Hillary Rodham Clinton, his pick in the Democratic contest.

The timing is critical.

Iowa holds its presidential caucuses on Thursday. Five days later, on Jan. 8, New Hampshire hosts the nation's first primary of the season. In New Hampshire, many presidential candidates are hoping to get as much support as possible from backers in neighboring Massachusetts.

Patrick, who endorsed Obama at a rally on Boston Common in October and is planning to campaign for him next weekend in New Hampshire, said he saw clear parallels between Obama's White House bid and his own campaign for governor last year. "There's an amazing organization, a lot of grassroots activism just like our race," Patrick said in a phone interview. Patrick said that much like his own campaign, Obama is working to draw out voters who might have been turned off to politics in the past. Motivating those voters is particularly important in Iowa, Patrick said. "There are a lot of people who haven't been involved in the political process in the past who are coming out," Patrick said. "That's how caucuses are won."

Patrick began Saturday's bus tour by introducing Obama at a campaign rally in Burlington, Iowa. Patrick repeated the introduction at three more rallies before heading out on his own. On Sunday Patrick started off at a house party of Obama supporters before moving on to a church and more campaign canvassing.

DiMasi focused his attention on nearby New Hampshire.

DiMasi, joined by about 20 members of the Massachusetts House and a few dozen volunteers, attended two rallies, the first in Portsmouth hosted by New Hampshire's Speaker of the House Terie Norelli. Later, DiMasi attended a second rally in Manchester.

"Hillary is smart, tough and experienced. We need somebody who is going to hit the ground running in the White House," DiMasi said, echoing a key Clinton campaign theme. "She is the one most capable of making the changes that everybody wants. There's no learning curve."

DiMasi -- who's butted heads with Patrick on key legislative initiatives, including Patrick's casinos plan -- pointed to Patrick's own ties to the Clintons. Patrick served as head of the Justice Department's civil rights division under former President Bill Clinton.

"I know that Gov. Patrick had worked with President Clinton and knows how capable Hillary Clinton is," DiMasi said.

Patrick also has deep ties to Obama. Both share Chicago roots and both were black student leaders at Harvard Law School.

DiMasi and Patrick aren't the only Massachusetts politicians serving as foot soldiers on the presidential campaign trail.

State Sen. Marc Pacheco, a Clinton supporter, flew off to Iowa to lend a hand. U.S. Rep. William Delahunt, who announced his endorsement of Obama this week, has also said he hopes to campaign for him in Iowa and New Hampshire.

On the Republican side, leaders in the Massachusetts GOP have split at least three ways among the top tier candidates, with former Gov. William Weld backing Mitt Romney, former Gov. Paul Cellucci supporting Rudy Giuliani and former acting Gov. Jane Swift endorsing John McCain.

Patrick said that regardless of which candidate ultimately wins the Democratic endorsement, he and DiMasi are both interested in seeing a Democrat in the White House.

"That's what it is, two of us campaigning for different candidates, but we'll all be together in the end," Patrick said.

Patrick and DiMasi planned to return to Massachusetts Sunday night. Patrick in particular doesn't want to be out of-state as another winter storm bears down on the region.

By Steve LeBlanc, The Boston Globe, December 30, 2007

Republicans Find Two Former Governors in the Lead, While Democrats Are Close in Numbers

Presidential hopefuls are putting in their final pushes before the Iowa caucuses, which are four days away. The last-ditch efforts come at a time when the three Democratic frontrunners are at each others' heels.

Polls have Hillary Clinton at 29 percent, while Barack Obama and John Edwards sit at 26 percent and 25 percent, respectively.

"The younger you are the more likely you are to support Obama," said Democratic strategist Robert Shrum. "The older you are the more likely you are to support Hillary Clinton. And of course, John Edwards is sitting there with very solid support in Iowa. ... I think any one of those three could probably win."

For Clinton, the inevitability of her campaign's candidacy has faded and the former first lady realizes she may not come in first in Iowa.

"This is a great contest. We don't have any heir apparent in the Democratic party," Clinton said in an exclusive interview with ABC News' George Stephanopoulos. "I'm out there fighting for every single caucus-goer. I'm out making my case to everybody that I can reach. I think this is what elections are supposed to be about."

Meanwhile, Edwards and Obama find themselves fighting for the same voters. Edwards even has begun to sound more like his opponent.

"My view is: It's the job of the president of the United States to unify and galvanize the American people, not to divide them," he said.

And on Saturday, Edwards tried to one-up Obama with a pledge. "When I am president of United States, no corporate lobbyists and no one who has lobbied for a foreign government will be working in my White House," he said.

Obama's campaign has attempted to lure Edwards' supporters, who may be more likely to shift than Clinton's. Obama claims he is the only Democrat who could beat a Republican. "I'm the only Democrat who does it. John Edwards doesn't do it," Obama said. "Part of the problem John would have in the general election is the issues that he's taking out now are not the issues or the things that he said four years ago."

The Republicans

On the Republican side of the battle, it seems two former governors are jockeying for first place in the Buckeye State. The once-dark horse Mike Huckabee has the momentum, and it's given him a lead in with polls with 37 percent. His closest rival, Mitt Romney, has 23 percent.

Romney has run three separate negative campaign advertisements against Huckabee on crime, immigration and foreign policy.

Huckabee has been firing back all weekend long. "He's making up things not about just our records, but making up things about his own in terms of things he saw," Huckabee said in an Iowa campaign speech. "I don't know, maybe you have another word for it. The only word I know in Arkansas, we kind of kept it simple there: We called it dishonest."

As the top two in the state battle it out, other high-profile candidates find themselves behind in the polls.

John McCain comes in third place with 11 percent in Iowa polls. The national Republican frontrunner Rudy Giuliani visited Iowa last week, but has spent limited time in the state, where he is in a four-way tie for third place.

It seems Giuliani's campaign largely has given up on winning in Iowa and his new television ad is not airing there.

Some argue he has spent his time on larger states like California and Florida, but Giuliani said his campaigning has been proportionate. "Spending time in the states that were going to vote in late January and early February not to the exclusion of the other states -- but a proportionate amount of time in those states -- was the best way to have ourselves in a position to win anywhere from 15 to 20 of the primaries rather than just three or four," Giuliani said.

Polls have him tied with Ron Paul and Fred Thompson.

Like Giuliani, McCain also is not in Iowa, but rather focusing on New Hampshire.

"I have the background, the capability, the concern to do this and I am doing it for the right reasons, but I am not particularly interested in running for president," Thompson said. "But I think I'd make a good president."

ABC News, December 30, 2007

WASHINGTON (AP) - The 2008 presidential race began so early that voters have been on a first-name basis for months with Hillary and Barack, Rudy, Mitt and the other contenders. Yet people seem no closer to choosing from among them.

Democrats are hopeful of reclaiming the White House, helped by President Bush's unpopularity, general unhappiness with the Iraq war and fears about the worsening housing and credit crunches. Those issues will be waiting for whoever succeeds him.

If dollars are any indication, the Democrats have generated more enthusiasm, pulling in about 50 percent more money than the Republican presidential candidates. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama, John Edwards and the other Democrats had raised $225.3 million to the Republicans' $149 million, as of Sept. 30.

In national polling, New York Sen. Clinton held a big lead throughout the year and was seen as the candidate to beat. Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani dominated the Republican field; his closest competitor, Arizona Sen. John McCain, plunged in the polls after spending too much money and losing several top aides. McCain righted his campaign and slowly began to climb. Actor-politician Fred Thompson was supposed to invigorate the GOP, but his entry into the race was late and lackluster. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney crept up steadily and led in early-voting states until Mike Huckabee, a Baptist preacher and conservative favorite, threatened to win Iowa.

The year ended as it began, with national leads for Clinton and Giuliani despite arguments that the former first lady is too polarizing and he is too liberal for his party.

Even so, the nomination races were far from settled where it really counts, in states where the nomination battles will be waged.

Why so chaotic? Two reasons, said David Rohde, political science professor at Duke University. There is no president or vice president running - for the first time in half a century - and people don't necessarily like their choices for new leaders.

"The main reason is that each of the candidates has some significant weakness," Rohde said. "This is more than not perfect. These are serious deficits."

Among Democrats, voters worry that if Clinton wins the nomination she might not win the general election, that Illinois Sen. Obama lacks experience and that former North Carolina Sen. Edwards isn't much different from when he and John Kerry ran and lost four years ago, Rohde said.

Among Republicans, voters are uncomfortable with Giuliani's left-leaning positions as New York mayor on abortion and other social issues. They're also concerned about Romney's flexible stances and his Mormonism, about McCain's independent inclinations and Thompson's muted campaigning, he said.

After nearly a year of presidential politicking, voters in Iowa and New Hampshire are divided among the leading candidates, and more than half are still undecided, according to CBS/New York Times polls in the two states.

That makes the race up for grabs in the states voting in the opening weeks of 2008.

Among Democrats, Clinton is essentially tied with Obama and Edwards in Iowa, which begins the voting with caucuses on Jan. 3. Her rivals view Iowa as the one place they might block Clinton.

Clinton is targeting women who are new to the Iowa caucuses, while Obama is courting young voters and Edwards is working to turn out traditional caucus attendees, especially those in rural areas. Clinton has a comfortable lead in New Hampshire, which votes on Jan. 8, and the former first lady has millions of dollars to compete in the states that come next.

As for Republicans, Romney hopes victories in Iowa and New Hampshire will clear a path for him in the later states though Huckabee had seized the edge in Iowa. Giuliani aims to win in bigger, later-voting states such as Florida on Jan. 29 and California, New York and Illinois on Feb. 5, but he still is taking on Romney in New Hampshire, where he recently began running his first TV ads of the campaign.

Thompson hopes to win on Jan. 19 in South Carolina, where he runs close to Giuliani and Romney in polls. McCain could do well in New Hampshire.

Potential spoilers lurk in Ron Paul, an underdog GOP Texas congressman who managed to raise more than $4 million in one day, and in New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a billionaire who could launch an independent bid next year.

On the issues, Democrats have been arguing lately about health care; Clinton and Edwards offer universal plans requiring everyone to have insurance, while Obama opposes such a requirement.

Immigration has become a dominant issue for Republicans: Many voters tell pollsters it's No. 1. Romney and Thompson are running ads that call for secure borders and denounce amnesty for illegal immigrants. Giuliani, who as mayor advocated some pro-immigrant policies, is calling for a "virtual" fence with high-tech monitoring to stop illegal immigration; his ads have focused on his crime-fighting and tax-cutting in New York.

By Libby Quaid, Associated Press, December 30, 2007

Dubuque, Ia. - Democrat Hillary Clinton on Saturday tried to drive home her belief that she is electable - and that she is best person to deal with "the unexpected."

"We look at all of the problems that await," she said in the town of Clinton. "And yet even with all of that, we do not know all of the difficulties the next president will face. It's the unpredictable. It's the unexpected as well as what we believe will happen."

In a rare move, Clinton took questions from reporters in Eldridge.

A reporter told her that rival Democrat Barack Obama has suggested that her foreign policy experience amounts to having tea with foreign leaders and that Democrat Christopher Dodd said her experience is akin to first lady Laura Bush's: witnessing experience, not having it.

Clinton responded that she's happy to talk about her experience in 80 countries, from working for peace in Northern Ireland to standing up for women's rights in Beijing.

Later in Dubuque, Clinton told a crowd of about 600 that as first lady, she represented America in "places that oftentimes were not necessarily a place a president could go."

"We used to say in the White House that if a place was too dangerous, too small or too poor, send the first lady," she said.

She said she was the first high-profile American to go into Bosnia after the peace accord was signed.

"We landed in one of those corkscrew landings and ran out because they said there might be sniper fire. I don't remember anyone offering me tea on the tarmac there."

Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor said Obama's tea comment was not a critique of another candidate. "What Senator Obama was referencing are trips to Europe paid at the taxpayers' expense that amount to little more than exchanging pleasantries at the embassy," he said.

Also Saturday, Clinton promised to look deeper into the causes of Gulf War syndrome after a Desert Storm veteran questioned her about it. "I promise you that among my priorities will be trying to get to the bottom of this," Clinton said.

She said when she was first lady, she investigated after veterans or their wives approached her about unexplainable ailments.

The reasons why military members got sick is still unknown - people have looked at the anthrax vaccines, the pesticides that were heavily used in sleeping and eating areas, and residue from depleted-uranium weapons, she said.

"One thing we did accomplish is that we forced the VA to recognize the Gulf War syndrome," Clinton said. "Couldn't give you the specifics, but because of the work I did, we did get to the point where you will be recognized as having some combination of ailments.

"But now we've to figure out what's really causing it and I promise you, I will do my best to get that done."

By Jennifer Jacobs, Des Moines Register, December 30, 2007

The ranks of the Grand Old Party of Abe Lincoln are divided as it goes into the Iowa caucus battle on Tuesday, with no agreement on what it stands for and no obvious contender to take on Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.

Clad in an orange and grey hunting jacket and an orange cap, Mike Huckabee raised his 12-gauge shotgun, took aim and fired, bagging a pheasant for the benefit of watching reporters. As another shot flew over their heads, it became too much for one journalist who cried: 'Oh, my God! Oh, my God! Don't shoot. This is traumatising.' Huckabee the hunter had demonstrated himself a 'regular guy', hoping to consolidate his lead in the Republican polls before Thursday's Iowa caucus, the first step to gaining the party's nomination for President.

His nearest rival, Mitt Romney, had shot himself in the foot by claiming to be an avid hunter, only to then confess he targeted mostly 'small varmints'. No such question marks over Huckabee, who said he not only hunted ducks, deer and antelopes but could eat varmint too. 'I figured out you could put grease in a popcorn popper and heat that thing up and you could cook anything,' he said of his student days. 'So we fried squirrel.'

There is growing unease among Republican organisers that the Grand Old Party of Lincoln, Eisenhower and Reagan could meet the same fate as Huckabee's squirrel. The presidential campaign has failed to produce a champion to take on Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, or whoever wins the Democratic nomination. Instead the struggle for the party's soul has exposed fissures in policy, disarray over what it now stands for and distractions both banal and bizarre, 'redneck stew' included.

Huckabee, an ordained Southern Baptist minister who does 'not necessarily buy into traditional Darwinian theory', and is celebrated for losing more than 100lb in weight, appeals to Christian evangelicals but not fiscal conservatives. Romney, a Mormon forced to backtrack over a claim that he saw his father march with Martin Luther King, appeals to social, economic and foreign policy conservatives, but not those who regard his religion as a cult.

Rudy Giuliani, the former New York mayor praised for his leadership after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, for his part plays well with so-called 'security moms' concerned about terrorism, but less well in the heartland because of his liberal views, three marriages and performance 10 years ago on Saturday Night Live as a granny in a floral dress. The resurgent Senator John McCain can trump varmint hunting with his Vietnam War record, but has refused to toe the party line on tax cuts and campaign finance reform.

And the one man none likes to mention as they burn up miles in Iowa is President George Bush.

The party is seen as divided, stale and saturated by religion. It has left jaded activists nostalgic for the certainties of the Reagan era and, after losing control of Congress in 2006, panicking about a meltdown in 2008.

Frank Luntz, the US pollster and political consultant, said there is no mistaking the mood in Iowa and New Hampshire, which holds its primary next week. 'Every time the response is the same,' he said. 'The Democrats can't wait for election day, they are so excited about the prospects and the candidates. The Republicans are much more nervous and much more dissatisfied. There's some disillusionment with the fortunes of the party. There's tremendous fear about the Democrats taking it all, and a sense that they have neither the messenger nor the message.'

The destiny the Republicans fear is that of the Conservatives in Britain in 1997: an unpopular leader overshadowed by a long-serving predecessor, a loss of direction and unity, a charismatic opponent promising change, and a hammering at the polls that spells years in the wilderness. The Republicans have plenty of candidates, but none has captured the imagination or threatened to dominate the landscape. Whereas the Democratic debates have shown an embarrassment of riches, including a woman and a black man with star quality, the Republicans have lined up mostly grey-haired men in suits and has lacked an ace. Whereas the Democratic race is thrilling - Clinton, Obama and John Edwards are virtually neck-and-neck - quantity rather than quality is the Republican byword.

Adam Nagourney, writing in the New York Times, said: 'It is hard to think of another campaign when Republicans have seemed less excited about their choices ... what is worrying Republicans these days is that this tepid rank-and-file reception to the best the party has to offer suggests that the Republican party is hitting a wall after dominating American politics for most of the last 35 years.' George Ajjan, a Republican pundit and analyst, said: 'It's definitely not a healthy party, that much is clear. The root of it is that from 11 September, 2001, until now the Republican party became a George W Bush personality cult where it was follow the leader, throw principles to the wind and support the agenda, whatever it might be at any given moment.

'Symptoms of that are a complete lack of leadership, complete lack of cohesion and very weak candidate line-up. If it was stronger, I think there would be more consensus on who should be the presidential nominee at this point.' He added: 'The Republican party under Bush spent so much of its political capital pursuing the war that a lot of what was traditionally considered a Republican platform about fiscal conservatism - cutting the budget, looking at how to streamline entitlements like social security - just fell off the agenda. A lot of people are upset with the President over immigration as well.'

Whatever Bush's reputation on the international stage, he appeared to succeed at party level in holding together an unlikely coalition of fiscal conservatives and free-market libertarians, 'compassionate' conservatives open to spending public money, an increasingly fractured Christian right, neoconservatives who led the charge into Iraq, and 'realists' who call for a return to pre-9/11 pragmatism in foreign affairs.

Now there are signs that it is falling apart, with the candidates personifying the fragmentation. For example, Giuliani, liberal on abortion and gay rights, and Huckabee, who promises to side with the people against high finance, 'would pull apart the coalition from opposite ends: Giuliani alienating the social conservatives and Huckabee the economic (and foreign policy) conservatives,' according to the right-wing National Review

Its online editor, Kathryn Jean Lopez, said: 'I do think Huckabee is tearing at the coalition - isolating economic conservatives, putting non-evangelical religious social conservatives in an awkward spot, as he seems to be running as a specifically evangelical candidate.'

In churchgoing Iowa, Huckabee's pitch - it's God, not the economy, stupid - has stolen the thunder of former Massachusetts governor Romney, who has poured millions of dollars into the state but cannot buy off anti-Mormon sentiments at any price. Huckabee has called for 'fair', not free, trade and insisted: 'The Republican party needs to represent not just the people on Wall Street but also the people on Main Street.'

He rises early each day, runs between six and 10 miles and reads a chapter from the Book of Proverbs. In his Christmas TV advert, he reminded viewers that 'what really matters is the celebration of the birth of Christ,' as a window behind him was lit to emphasise the shape of a cross. Huckabee has attributed his miraculous rise to 'the same power that helped a little boy with two fish and five loaves feed a crowd of 5,000'.

Faith came to the fore during Reagan's campaign, but now it has gone too far, according to the political commentator Charles Krauthammer. He complained recently: 'This campaign is knee-deep in religion and it's only going to get worse.'

The danger for the Republicans is that this could alienate not only non-Christians but anyone who feels anxious about the blurring of boundaries between church and state, playing into the Democrats' hands. However, Huckabee is not faring so well in New Hampshire, where the Christian right holds less sway and he has been branded hopelessly naive on foreign policy. One pundit rated his chances against the Democrat nominee as: 'Dead on arrival.'

Instead many still predict that Giuliani will overcome likely setbacks in Iowa and New Hampshire to win most states in the primary elections on 'Super Tuesday', 5 February. He was the Republican mayor of a Democratic city and is seen as capable of reaching into the middle ground. He mentions Hillary Clinton at every opportunity on the road and is spoiling for the fight.

If their self-preservation instinct kicks in, many Republicans might then be expected swallow their doubts about Giuliani's colourful past and liberal views and rally to his cause. Like the Tories before 1997, they have a formidable reputation as an election-winning machine, as they demonstrated when upsetting the odds to beat John Kerry in 2004. Indeed, some say they are instinctively better at campaigning than governing.

Iowa indicators

- Since 1972, no candidate who finished worse than third in Iowa has won a major party presidential nomination.

- Iowa has more pigs than people. Its human population is three million. Iowa is 91.5 per cent white, compared with 66.9 per cent of all America. It is 2.3 per cent African-American, compared with 12.8 per cent nationwide. Hispanics make up 3.7 per cent of its people, compared with 14.4 per cent across the nation.

- Three Democrats - Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards - are running virtually neck-and-neck in the polls.

- Among Republicans, a Los Angeles Times poll puts Mike Huckabee at 37 per cent and Mitt Romney on 23 per cent, with John McCain and Fred Thompson both on 11 per cent. But New Hampshire looks very different and victory in Iowa might prove insignificant.

- The Democrats have spent the most on TV advertising in Iowa. Obama has ploughed in $8.3m, Clinton $6.5m and Edwards $2.7m. As of 28 December their adverts had been shown 44,600 times, compared with a Democratic total of 28,054 four years ago.

- Famous Iowans include jazz cornet and trumpet player Bix Beiderbecke, comedian Johnny Carson, actors John Wayne and Elijah Wood, and the 31st US President, Herbert Hoover.

By David Smith, The Observer, December 30, 2007

Events on the world stage don't necessarily translate into the American political process but they can have a big impact. In December of 2003, Howard Dean appeared headed toward an easy walk to the Democratic nomination. That month, U.S. forces captured Saddam Hussein, a major development in a war Dean had based his candidacy on opposing. When Dean claimed that Hussein's capture had "not made America safer," a comment that drew criticism from his primary opponents who wondered aloud about the risk of nominating a governor from Vermont with little foreign policy experience and even less restraint.

A month later, voters in Iowa agreed with those criticisms and sent Dean into a tailspin with a third-place finish. Dean's remarks on Hussein weren't the only reasons for his campaign meltdown of course, but events did contribute to it. It's worth looking at how campaigns handled the news of yesterday's assassination of Pakistan opposition leader Benazir Bhutto - especially two Iowa front-runners.

Mike Huckabee, who vaulted into a strong lead in the caucus state last month, spent part of the day explaining what he meant when he first responded to news of the crisis. As CBS News' Nancy Cordes reports, Huckabee expressed his "sincere concern and apologies for what has happened in Pakistan" - a statement that led to questions about what exactly he was apologizing for. The Huckabee campaign clarified his remarks, saying that the candidate "intended to extend his deepest sympathies to the people of Pakistan when he used the word 'apologies.'"

And, when voicing his concerns about what may happen in Pakistan as a result, Huckabee indicated that he was worried about whether martial law in the country will be "continuing" despite the fact it has been suspended for almost two weeks. The campaign again responded, saying, "Governor Huckabee firmly believes that emergency rule/martial law in Pakistan, as a practical matter, should not be viewed as having been completely lifted until the restrictions imposed during that period on the press and judges are removed." It's a lot of parsing, perhaps, but in the last week of the campaign, nearly everything a front-runner says will be under a microscope. For a candidate with little foreign policy experience and almost no policy advisors, those words will be even more finely parsed.

Barack Obama, on the other hand, seemed to say all the right things. As he has throughout the campaign, he said that the war in Iraq has diverted the nation's attention to the dangerous situation in Pakistan. "It's an indication that we are in a dangerous world," he said, "right now that we have to apply good judgment in our foreign policy." But Obama advisor David Axelrod took that argument a little further as it applies to Hillary Clinton. "I think people need to judge where these candidates were and what they've said and what they've done on these issues," Axelrod told reporters. "She was a strong supporter of the war in Iraq, which we would submit, was one of the reasons why we were diverted from Afghanistan, Pakistan and al-Qaeda, who may have been players in this event today, so that's a judgment she'll have to defend."

Axelrod later told CBS News' Chief Political Consultant Marc Ambinder that he was "in no way" implying that Clinton's position had anything to do with the assassination. "All I'm implying is [about] the policy that the war in Iraq that Obama said in 2002 was going to distract us from Afghanistan and Pakistan and Al Qaeda, and that they would regenerate themselves and that they would become more powerful and influential. He exercised good judgment. She'll have to explain her position."

Obama himself addressed Axelrod's comments in an appearance on "Larry King Live" last night. "He was asked very specifically about the argument that the Clinton folks were making that somehow this was going to change the dynamic of politics in Iowa," Obama said. "First of all, that shouldn't have been the question. The question should be, how is this going to impact the safety and security of the United States, not how is it going to affect a political campaign in Iowa." He added, "he in no way was suggesting that Hillary Clinton was somehow directly to blame for this situation. That is the kind of, I think, gloss that sometimes emerges out of the heat of campaigns that doesn't make much sense."

Whether it makes sense or not, there are just six days left before Iowans weigh in on this presidential race. A day spent explaining what candidates or advisors meant to say isn't the most efficient use of that time.


Clinton Edges Up In Iowa, Obama In New Hampshire: A new Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll has Clinton with a slight lead among likely Iowa caucus-goers, leading John Edwards 31 percent to 25 percent with Obama at 22 percent. In New Hampshire, Obama leads with 32 percent with Clinton at 30 percent and Edwards at 20 percent.

On the GOP side, Huckabee still leads among likely caucus goers in Iowa with 34 percent while Mitt Romney is at 28 percent, Fred Thompson at 10 percent and John McCain and Rudy Giuliani tied with eight percent. In New Hampshire, Romney leads over McCain 34 percent to 20 percent with Giuliani at 17 percent and Huckabee at 12 percent.


Romeny On The Offensive: The Romney campaign has been fighting a two-front war for weeks now, trying to fend off Huckabee in Iowa and a resurgent McCain in New Hampshire. Before the holiday break, Romney ran an ad in Iowa contrasting in negative terms, Huckabee's record with his own as governor of Massachusetts. Today the Romney campaign begins a New Hampshire ad taking on McCain.

"John McCain, an honorable man. But is he the right Republican for the future? McCain opposes repeal of the death tax, and voted against the Bush tax cuts twice. McCain pushed to let every illegal immigrant stay here permanently. Even voted to allow illegals to collect Social Security. And Mitt Romney? Mitt Romney cut taxes and spending as Governor. He opposes amnesty for illegals. Mitt Romney. John McCain. There is a difference."

Meanwhile, McCain is up with a new ad in New Hampshire touting his slew of newspaper endorsements. "After taking a close look, 20 newspapers all across New Hampshire endorse John McCain. Here's what they're saying: McCain campaigns with decency ... The right stuff ... To become among our greatest presidents ... Principled ... Character ... Integrity and honor ... Impeccable national security credentials ... McCain transcends partisanship ... Most trustworthy... The man to lead America ... All across New Hampshire newspapers agree ... The choice is clear. For President: John McCain."





By Vaughn Ververs, CBS News, December 28, 2007

In the 2008 presidential race, polls are inevitably mercurial, but they also can provide a compelling snapshot into the national body politic. It comes as no surprise that a recent Fox 5/Washington Times/Rasmussen poll shows former President Clinton is both an albatross and an asset for his wife's presidential bid.

According to the poll, some 43 percent of adults in the general population think that Mr. Clinton is a net positive for Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign, but 41 percent think he carries too much baggage, while 13 percent say he has a neutral effect. However, these figures shift dramatically when the poll homes in on Democratic voters, who by a margin of 70 percent to 17 percent said they thought Mr. Clinton has a positive rather than negative effect on the Clinton campaign.

Predictably, the trend is reversed among Republicans, among whom 22 percent said Mr. Clinton is a boon for Mrs. Clinton's bid, while 62 percent feel that Mr. Clinton brings questionable trappings. Perhaps most critically, among third-party or independent voters, 47 percent feel that Mr. Clinton is a minus and just 32 percent responded that he is a plus. This margin is striking; it seems that a majority of independent voters would rather see a candidate who isn't tied to a controversial figure such as Mr. Clinton, who has the dubious honor of being one of only two presidents in our nation's history to be impeached.

Interestingly, there is a notable gender gap among younger voters on the subject, with 47 percent of men under age 40 viewing Mr. Clinton as a positive for the campaign, while just 37 percent of their female counterparts share that view. Apparently the notorious charmer isn't beguiling younger women these days.

Our survey of 1,000 adults, which had a margin of error of three points and was taken Dec. 18-19, also found that just 41 percent of respondents know where the top presidential candidates stand on the issues they find most important, while a remarkable 38 percent said they don't know. (Don't expect the media to take this to heart, however, and shift their reporting and focus to substantive issues rather than the all-to-common, trivial horserace fare.)

When asked about the hypothetical scenario of their favorite presidential candidate playing "dirty" or taking pot shots at their opponents, 57 percent of voters said they would "think twice" about supporting that candidate, while 26 percent said they wouldn't and 17 percent were undecided. The candidates themselves should listen to a resounding message from this poll: Negative campaigning is risky business.

The Washington Times, December 29, 2007

Lots of things look different on the ground with a week to go

WASHINGTON - If Hillary Clinton ends up surviving Iowa, I will know the reason: her husband. In Cedar Rapids, Iowa, the other night, I saw a tired but still feisty Bill Clinton give the most (actually the first) convincing recitation I'd ever heard of his wife's career accomplishments - you know, the achievements that supposedly make her the "steady hand" the country now needs.

By the time Bill was done, Hillary sounded like a cross between Margaret Mead, Mother Teresa and Lyndon Johnson. The 900 or so Democrats at the Hawkeye Downs race track seemed to go home happy.

On a pit stop here between stretches in Iowa, I can tell you this: things look different on a snowy I-80 than they do on the East Coast and inside the Beltway.

The pundits, including me, scoffed at the former president's role in the campaign, on the theory that he brings too many bad associations with him to the trail. But the fact is, the man could sell ice cones to the Inuit, and Democrats in Iowa still adore the guy.

Lots of other things look different when you're driving around the state chasing candidates and campaigns, as I have done in recent days, and as I will be doing again soon. Here are a few:

OBAMA'S "FIRE"

Barack Obama may be riding a generational wave of change. Often it feels just like that. But while he draws large crowds, I am never quite sure that they leave his events as "fired up" as when they enter. That's how it seemed to me the other night in Coralville. The crowd was big and adoring in a somewhat abstract way. But when he went into his final "Fired up/Ready to Go" chant, the mostly upscale and well-educated voters in the motel ballroom kept the lid on. Part of that is just Iowa: they are not the most demonstrative people. But it's something else, too. Perhaps the IDEA of Obama (a new beginning; an historical figure or racial progress; a soothing message to the world) is too hard for the man himself to match.

THE HUCKABEE CHRISTMAS AD

You know the ad ... the one in which, horror of horrors, Mike Huckabee wears a red sweater, mentions Jesus and wishes everybody a Merry Christmas. Back East, folks were hysterical; in Iowa, especially but not exclusively among Republicans, the ad was seen as a nice, homey, appropriate touch. In Iowa, they still say "Merry Christmas" to each other for the most part, even on the radio, and the national press reaction played into Huck's hands.

GOOD TIMES

John Edwards has set the pace, and dictated much of the tone, of the Democratic race - a tough, populist, anti-corporate message. Perhaps he can win on the strength of it. His crowds are good, too, and more of the "fired up" variety. He's got a lot of union organizers straight out of the old-school, shouting slogans through megaphones made of rolled up posters. But I remain skeptical, for one reason: these are for the most part good times in Iowa. If you listen to WHO radio, the legendary, 50,000-watt clear-channel station that covers the state, you know that corn and soybean prices are at an all time high. Farmers are flush, and so are a lot of other people. If Edwards wins in the face of that, it's a huge signal about the future of economic fear.

SOCIAL DYNAMICS

On the Democratic side, what matters will be the intricate, local dynamics of each of the 1,700 individual caucuses. By now you junkies know how this works; my point is the outcome could well be decided by the savvy and determination of the precinct leaders for each candidate. There may be a lot of loose change available on the second go round of presidential preference votes: votes available in the many places where Joe Biden, Chris Dodd and Bill Richardson do not "make threshold" the first time. Obama has attracted a young crew of smart and savvy kids, many from other states. They are charming and diligent - the sort who do a good job on their term papers. But how far have they penetrated into the hearts of the little towns and suburban neighborhoods where the race will be won or lost?

IOWANS

People grouse about their exaggerated role. There is that professor back east who tried to quantify it: Iowans had 20 times the power of anyone else. A better system, in my view, would be a lottery to change the starting two states every four years, instead of the Iowa/New Hampshire tango. But here we are. And when you spend time in Iowa, and I have spent a lot of it over the years, you realize how prepared for it they are. The state has the highest high school test scores and college attendance rates, and there is something about the mixture of Quaker, Scandinavian and Yankee history that makes them take it all so seriously. Pundits complain about how "white" Iowa is, which is true. But if he can win there, Obama will have gotten a seal of approval that he could wear all the way to the White House next year.

By Howard Fineman, MSNBC, December 27, 2007

(CNN) - In the final weekend before Iowa voters kick off the presidential primary season, Democrats Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton each raised questions about the other's ability to beat the Republican Party's nominee next November.

"We are less likely to win an election that starts off with half the country not wanting to vote for that candidate," Obama said Saturday at an event in Madison. "We are less likely also to win an election with somebody who had one set of positions four years ago and has almost entirely different positions four years later. We've been through that," he also said in comments that seemed to be directed at John Edwards. At a later event he said the same thing and named Edwards.

Clinton quickly responded in a media availability in Eldredge, sounding her familiar campaign theme that she has already proven her ability to withstand the "Republican attack machine," and suggesting Obama has yet to be tested.

"I have been around a while," the New York Democrat said. "I have seen a lot of elections come and go, and who ever our Democratic nominee is will be subjected to the full force and effect of the Republican attack machine."

"Unfortunately that is the barrier that you have to overcome," she added. "What you know with me, I have already overcome it. I have withstood it, and not only survived it but thrived over the last 16 years. So there is very little guess work."

By Chris Welch and Mike Roselli, CNN, December 29, 2007

Armed with a briefing book and a scouting report the size of a small encyclopedia, Gavin Newsom - the mayor of very urban, very liberal San Francisco - found himself traveling for hours across an eerie landscape of ice-shrouded trees and tiny towns tucked into the endless snow-covered plains.

And the mission here for Newsom - a high-profile surrogate for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in the nation's most competitive political terrain - was to help deliver the gold: those elusive, undecided Iowa caucus voters who could make or break his candidate's presidential campaign.

He recalled just how tough it can be: A Des Moines house party hostess directed him to take off his shoes, sit on the couch, and start calling voters. But it was clear, he said, that they were hard to impress. Iowans are being wooed, day in and day out, by some very important people.

"We don't even consider a candidate unless they dry my dishes," the hostess told Newsom with a smile.

"She wasn't kidding," the San Francisco mayor said.

Yes, this is Iowa, where, with just days to go before the first votes of the 2008 presidential election on Thursday, the final frenzy to make the sale is on - and at the kind of intensely personal retail level that most Californians will never experience. Iowa, with just 2.9 million residents and a state budget smaller than the city of San Francisco's, has unusual clout, coming first in the parade of electoral events that will decide the nominees of the Republican and Democratic parties.

The San Francisco mayor was tapped by the Clinton campaign to travel here earlier this month to address voters on health care, preschool and gay and lesbian issues. But he was just one of several Californian politicos who've gone vote hunting in the far corners of the Hawkeye State as the crucial opening of the 2008 presidential race approaches.

Iowa this week is jammed with temporary immigrants from the Golden State, whether media types covering the madness, or campaign volunteers and staffers, or big name surrogates like Newsom.

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and actors Ted Danson and Mary Steenburgen are working the terrain this week for Clinton; San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris, Bay Area attorney Tony West and Los Angeles City Council President Eric Garcetti are on the road for Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, while actor Martin Sheen is stumping for New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson. But there are also the campaign insiders, like former California GOP spokeswoman Sarah Pompeii, now a lead press aide to former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, and Darrel Ng, a former aide to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who is shepherding reporters across the state following former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson.

For some of them, the experience can be both exhausting and surreal - but also unforgettable.

Newsom, in an interview, recalled how he charged from tiny middle school theater to weather-beaten Elks Club, from local bar to coffee art house, from Cedar Rapids to Fairfield to Solon, working phone parties and home gatherings, in the space of a few hours. It wasn't unusual, he said, to bump elbows with other prominent surrogates - like former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright - in comfy living rooms and at worn kitchen tables.

As a Democratic celebrity from the nation's most populous state, the San Francisco mayor's challenge involved sitting sometimes with a dozen voters on the fence, sometimes with just one. With the help of detailed briefing profiles - including individuals' occupations, concerns and even what they might ask ("she will want to know when Sen. Clinton will be back") - he tried to discern how he could best win them over.

The mayor said he answered their questions on everything from universal health care, to preschool programs, to more arcane stuff like, "What is Hillary Clinton's policy on MSG?"

"In some cases, I made the sale, and in some, it was almost impossible," a hoarse Newsom, fighting a cold, recalled last week. "I had one guy, it was almost an hour and a half. I couldn't break him. Every argument, I tried. I thought I had him on every point," he said.

Then, finally, the man told the mayor, "You're right, Clinton is better on every point."

"So you think you can help us?" Newsom asked.

"I'm still not sure," the man told Newsom apologetically.

The same challenges are now confronting San Francisco District Attorney Harris, who arrived this week with a suitcase stuffed with down coats and long johns from North Face, and a determination to take a few days off from battling crime to battle for Obama in towns like Knoxville, Indianola and Newton. As the candidate's co-chair for women and African American voters, Harris will have a full schedule, hitting churches and get-out-the-vote rallies with a mind to traverse Iowa and "do it all, phone banking, canvassing, knocking on doors and licking stamps."

Although the flat-as-a-pancake landscape couldn't be more different from San Francisco, Iowa's political landscape has many similarities, Harris said. In both places, local politics can be exhaustive and enormously challenging, and Iowa's regular voters, like those in San Francisco, tend to be engaged, aware - and very, very discerning.

"You can't get more retail in terms of politics than campaigning for office in San Francisco. The way we run, and win, campaigns is by being on the ground, shaking hands, and talking one-on-one with voters," she said. "Like San Francisco, Iowa has a tradition and history of taking politics seriously, of really being engaged. They're complex and intelligent enough to ask the first question, and then the second."

Villaraigosa, the Los Angeles mayor, discovered that for himself on Saturday, swathed in a long black cashmere coat and running from voter to voter in the parking lot of the Hy Vee Food & Drug Co. in Des Moines to buttonhole potential Clinton supporters.

He ran into Christie Vilsack, Iowa's former first lady, running out with a bag of black-eyed peas she planned to cook - "for luck" - for Clinton for the New Year. Villaraigosa slapped her on the back and headed into the store's produce section, where he energetically approached Brad Richardson, a research scientist at the University of Iowa, with his son Sam, 7, in tow.

"I'm doing this the old-fashioned way," he told Richardson. "I'm supporting Hillary Clinton ... because this is the most important election in my lifetime."

Richardson, a juvenile justice expert who recognized the Los Angeles mayor and invited him to an upcoming conference, said such Iowa visits by high profile politicians from afar are both illuminating and valuable.

"When you bring in people from the outside, it gets people thinking," he said. "It shines a bright light. In the end, local people do the voting, but the presence of national people is important."

Ng rode with reporters in a press bus from Chariton to Knoxville for five different events, admitting the schedule of all this excitement is sometimes daunting. "I'll admit not knowing what city I'm in at any given time."

Ng, like the rest of the Californians, has learned to live with the political challenges - and oh yes, the bone-chilling weather. "We drink a lot of hot chocolate," he said.

But Peter Ragone, a Democratic operative and aide to Newsom, said the discomforts are more than exceeded by the moments that make this the only place to be as the 2008 presidential campaign formally begins.

"You step off the plane, the trees are encased in ice and look like glass figurines, and you can see the cold in the air," he said. "It's a wet cold, and you drive across the plains and you can see how flat it is in the dark. And you get to a small town, and they have Christmas decorations in the town square, and a beautiful gazebo, and it's a Friday night and it's cold. And about a dozen people show up."

It is there, in those small groups, that American presidential politics finally gets down to business, said Newsom.

"There's a seriousness. They recognize what's at stake. You're talking about world peace here, not just cleaner streets," he said. "You have to connect with them on a human level. ... You can't get away with anything else."

Newsom said before he arrived, "I was a big city guy who walked into Iowa saying, 'What is this? It's crazy.'

"And I left saying, 'Thank you, Iowa. This is real.' "

THE GENDER card is still the wild card for Hillary Clinton.

By now, Clinton knows the downside of being a female presidential candidate. Her cleavage, laugh, wrinkles, and marriage periodically undergo deep political analysis. She has been called a bitch and depicted as a witch.

Barack Obama can quote Martin Luther King Jr. But if Clinton writes an online essay for Glamour magazine, she is criticized for pandering to women.

So, is there still enough upside in her womanhood to win her the Democratic nomination?

Clinton appears to be banking on it. On the campaign trail, she talks about making history and clearly revels in the women of all ages who come up to her and tell her they are inspired by her candidacy. Her mother and daughter are campaigning on Clinton's behalf. They are there to support her, but also to connect with female voters, who often bring daughters of their own to Clinton campaign events.

But gender remains a double-edged sword. How Clinton is playing it - or overplaying it - remains at the heart of the debate over her candidacy, inside the campaign and in the media.

Clinton's campaign encountered its first serious pushback last fall after issuing complaints that her male rivals were piling on after an Oct. 30 debate in Philadelphia. That appeal to victimhood made Clinton seem weak at the very moment she had strength as the perceived front-runner. It was a strategic misstep, which stalled her campaign more than the actual issue that drew the attack from rivals - an imprecise answer she gave to a question about whether illegal immigrants should be allowed to obtain a driver's license.

Bill Clinton's efforts on his wife's behalf also draw a mixed response. While the former president is popular with some Democrats, his presence on the campaign trail forces Hillary Clinton to define her experience from the vantage point of former first lady. It also puts the Clinton marriage front and center, detracting from Hillary Clinton the presidential candidate.

As the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary loom, Clinton is telling voters, "I'm very excited about the possibility of becoming the first woman president." The comment drew this headline in The Washington Times: "Hillary dangles prospect of first female president."

Of course she would be the first female president, and voters, including men, realize it. But on its own, that's not enough to win the nomination or the presidency, even if the latest USA Today/Gallup poll shows that Clinton is the woman Americans admire most. After all, Oprah Winfrey, who is actively campaigning for Obama, is only two points behind in the poll.

Voting for the first woman president would be "voting for an historic moment," said Bion Piepmeier,, 23, as he and a friend, Chris Devine, also 23, waited to gain entrance to a recent Clinton campaign event in Manchester, N.H.

These two self-described political junkies are graduates of Connecticut College, where they belonged to the Connecticut College Republicans. Disillusioned with the Bush administration, they were checking out presidential candidates on the weekend before Christmas. In that spirit, they, along with a few other men, showed up for what was billed primarily as a mother/daughter event for Clinton.

Both young men were looking for reasons beyond making history to consider a Clinton vote. Both found some, and in their response lies Clinton's strongest case to voters in the primaries and beyond.

"Quite frankly, I was very impressed with Sen. Clinton. I thought she gave detailed, concise answers to all the questions posed to her . . . I thought she really connected with her audience. I'm still very much on the fence about whom I will support, but after seeing her up close I feel much more comfortable with the idea of her leading this nation," said Piepmeier, via e-mail, after the Clinton event.

While leaning toward Republican John McCain, Devine said, via e-mail, "I was thoroughly impressed with Sen. Clinton. I found her to be personable and articulate . . . Quite simply, hers was a speech that George W. Bush could never dream of delivering and one that Barack Obama should be delivering instead of his customary series of abstractions and platitudes."

Those are the attributes Clinton should be stressing. The way to make history is to show voters she is the best candidate, not the only female candidate.

By Joan Vennochi, The Boston Globe, December 30, 2007

STORY CITY, Iowa - Even as her prospects teeter for winning the crucial Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary, Hillary Clinton has renewed her focus on a foe who is not in the race: President Bush.

Since returning to the campaign trail after a two-day Christmas respite, Clinton has unveiled a whole new vocabulary of attacks on the Bush administration, debuting phrases such as "the two oilmen in the White House," and the "imaginary credit card in the sky" that she says Bush has relied on to fund his tax cuts for the wealthy and to help pay for the war in Iraq.

"They've turned that wonderful phrase by Abraham Lincoln on its head: They have a government of the few, by the few, and for the few," she said Thursday evening in western Iowa.

Yesterday, she leveled withering criticism on Bush for giving President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan a "blank check." And her campaign released a new television ad in Iowa declaring that Bush and Wall Street "did nothing" as the housing crisis mushroomed in the summer and fall.

"Senator Clinton's attacks on the president will not provide her with the credibility on foreign policy issues she so desperately desires," said Danny Diaz, Republican National Committee spokesperson in an e-mail. "Clinton has failed to demonstrate any level of resolve as our men and women in uniform fight terrorists in Iraq and can not be trusted to ensure they receive the resources they need. Ultimately, Senator Clinton will be judged by her record, not rhetoric.”

Criticizing Bush has long been a centerpiece of her campaign, but this tactic receded as she began suffering in the polls and faced criticism that she was running a general election campaign, as if she had already won the nomination. She turned more of her attention to drawing contrasts with her leading rival, Barack Obama.

But this week, Bush has once again become the central foil in her campaign narrative. While the topic doesn't help her draw a distinction with her competitors, it is dear to the hearts of many Democrats, and even disaffected Republicans, who appear to make up notable proportions of her audiences in some parts of Iowa.

"I'm a registered Republican, but I'm very discouraged with the Bush administration," said Kay Resel, a community college instructor who is volunteering as precinct captain for the Clinton campaign. After seeing Clinton speak in rural Lawton on Thursday, she said many of her neighbors feel similarly. "I do have a sense that people are leaning more toward Democratic candidates."

Speaking yesterday about former Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto's assassination on Thursday, Clinton spent several minutes detailing what she views as Bush's failures in dealing with instability in Afghanistan and Pakistan. She described calling the White House after a trip to Pakistan last January, saying that the relationship between Musharraf and President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan was dangerously broken and suggesting that the United States send a high-level envoy to try to mediate.

"Like so much else in dealing with the Bush administration, the answer was, 'No, we're going to do what we're going to do,' " she said.

A campaign spokesman said Clinton is not any more focused on Bush than she had been before. But it sounds as if she spent the Christmas break brainstorming new lines for her stump speech.

At each stop, she describes having helped to undo a Pentagon policy to deny signing bonuses to troops who are injured in Iraq. And then she adds, as she put it yesterday, "Just when I thought it was impossible to be surprised by the Bush administration . . ."

By Marcella Bombardieri, The Boston Globe, December 29, 2007

Presidential candidates are sharpening their focus on what appears to be the economic trend of the election: the U.S. housing slump. Hillary Clinton released a television ad Friday in which the New York senator imagines what she would have done this year to rescue homeowners struggling with housing payments had she already been elected president. Mrs. Clinton also made it clear in the ad who is at fault for not stemming the rise foreclosure rates and decline in home prices: President Bush and Wall Street.

"What if we had a different president this year? Hillary Clinton called for action on America's housing crisis in March, in June, in August. George Bush and Wall Street did nothing. Since then home prices have plummeted," the ad says. "And millions may lose their homes. Hillary's plan: Freeze home foreclosures; freeze rates on adjustable mortgages; provide real tax relief for the middle class. When we choose a president next year, let's choose one that would have started fixing our economy this year."

Mrs. Clinton isn't alone in talking about helping homeowners. Many other Democratic candidates have called for freezing adjustable-rate mortgages, creating a government fund to help homeowners refinance troubled loans and changing bankruptcy laws to allow judges to alter the terms of home loans.

What's driving the strategy? Republican and Democratic contenders are aiming to gain the favor of voters in early primary states where the housing downturn has created the most pain, including Nevada, Michigan and Florida.

By Alex Frangos, The Wall Street Journal, December 29, 2007

He was arguably the greatest hero in the history of American cinema, a leader of men who beat the bad guys and symbolised patriotic values.

But here in the birthplace of John Wayne, in the snowy wilds of an Iowa winter, the US is picking another leader - a president to command the respect of modern America and deal with the world's villains, who have swapped Stetsons and Colt 45s for suicide bomb belts.

On Thursday the world's most important - and protracted - democratic process gets underway, when voters in this mid-West corn belt state become the first to pick their presidential candidates.

The result of the Iowa caucuses, a series of town hall votes, will help answer the question now gripping the nation: is America, the land of John Wayne machismo, finally ready to elect Hillary Clinton its first women president?

Declared a shoo in by her own advisers over the summer, Mrs Clinton now finds herself locked in a three-way tie with Barack Obama and John Edwards for victory in Iowa, the state that begins the month-long battle to secure the White House nominations. While there are 50 other states to go, defeat for Mrs Clinton in Iowa would be hugely embarrassing and severely damage her chances in the rest of the contest.

The final post-Christmas frenzy of campaigning proves that many Iowa voters are still looking for a president who offers the reassuring certainties of John Wayne's world, while the increasingly bitter exchanges between the candidates resemble nothing so much as a brutal shootout from one of the Duke's Westerns.

The challenge Mrs Clinton faces is clear in Winterset, where Wayne was born in 1907 at the heart of Madison County, whose covered bridges gave their name to the 1995 Hollywood movie.

At the Wayne birthplace museum, tour guide Glenna Finney, 67, has no time for Mrs Clinton, or the memory of her husband's White House dalliance with Monica Lewinsky. "The majority of people here are retired and they are Republicans. I don't think they're ready for a woman president. Some of them have a hard time having a female pastor," she said.

"People here expect you to have manners. A decent name is to be treasured. How will President Clinton be remembered? Not for any of the good things he did. Where was his decency?

"There's nothing badly wrong with this good old America that John Wayne couldn't have fixed. It was Mid West values that made him so strong. I'm looking for someone who offers leadership, honesty and integrity."

In Des Moines, Iowa's state capital, drivers tooted their horns on Friday as John Strong, 66, a former soldier, brandished a banner reading "Veterans Against Hillary". He has become a familiar sight at campaign events in the city, accompanied by a Halloween effigy of Mrs Clinton in a witch's hat. He said: "I don't mind her being a woman, but she is weak on national defence and she's very condescending and nasty. She is part of the liberal elite and she is a fake when she says she cares about regular people."

Mrs Clinton may not look or sound like John Wayne, (who was friends with Ronald Reagan), but she fights like him and provokes similar macho posturing from her rivals.

She accused Obama's camp of "politicising" the assassination of Benazir Bhutto after comments by one of his aides appeared to blame Mrs Clinton's support for the Iraq war for diverting attention from Islamic militancy in Pakistan. Mr Obama hit back, saying Mrs Clinton's much touted foreign policy "experience" amounted to "what leaders you went and had tea with".

David Axelrod, Mr Obama's chief strategist, told The Sunday Telegraph that the Clinton camp's aggression was evidence of their nervousness. "The next week is extraordinarily important," he said after Mr Obama delivered a speech urging 300 voters in the town of Nevada to "believe" in his promise of change.

"Everyone needs to get off to a good start. The question is not whether we can match the Clintons, but whether the Clintons are up to us." On the Republican side, Iowa boils down to a battle between Mike Huckabee, the Baptist preacher and former governor of Arkansas, and Mitt Romney, the Mormon former Governor of Massachusetts. Both are under fire since the Bhutto assassination for their lack of foreign policy expertise.

But the other main talking point among Republicans has been the resurrection of John McCain. The Arizona senator's support in Iowa has doubled in the last ten days, partly as a result of the Vietnam veteran's perceived wisdom in foreign affairs. He now hopes to grab third place, securing a momentum which could see him beat Mr Romney in the New Hampshire primary election a week on Tuesday.

Mr McCain's re-emergence is also a danger to Mrs Clinton. He is widely perceived to have the best chance of beating her in the general election. He told The Sunday Telegraph: "I have a better chance because I'm the most qualified. I think every poll shows that."

The final shoot-out will soon be underway in Iowa, and by Friday morning, political corpses will litter the fields. But the parallels with a John Wayne film are limited. The Wayne museum gift shop sells mugs bearing his famous dictum: "Talk low, talk slow and don't talk too much." There is precious little chance of anyone obeying that in Iowa this week.

By Tim Shipman, The Telegraph, December 30, 2007

In the chaotic, colourful, cathartic American primary campaign of the past few months, it has in the end come down to a clarifying choice.

In a completely open field - with no incumbent president or vice-president running and both Republicans and Democrats casting about in a newly fluid ideological world - two fundamental emotions have bubbled to the surface. In the final few days before the first critical contest in Iowa, the race is between hope and fear.

The reasons for fear are obvious. America is still adjusting to the impact of 9/11 and the gruelling wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The country is also experiencing a wave of immigration - much of it illegal and uncontrollable - greater than anything since the beginning of the last century.

In the past few years, what were once heartland certainties have been shattered: America is immune from direct military attack; America's public culture is overwhelmingly Christian; America does not torture prisoners; if the worst happens - a hurricane like Katrina - the federal government comes to the rescue. All these bedrock assumptions have been called into question. These are unnerving, unmoored times and the candidates who have based their campaigns on fear - and their ability to assuage and reassure - have propelled themselves to prominence.

Among the Republicans, Rudy Giuliani banked everything on his response to 9/11. Fear of Al-Qaeda resonated through every speech. The assassination of Benazir Bhutto might be seen as a boon to his campaign. But in the end, Giuliani's utterly unnuanced commitment to fighting back any time, anywhere, did not reassure. It alarmed. His mercurial temperament, fiery egotism and willingness to make enemies of everyone have become liabilities. He has fallen consistently in the polls for the entire year.

Mitt Romney, at the start, pitched himself as an inveterate optimist. Alas, his set speeches often came off as robotic invocations of themes lifted from the 1980s. And so his pitch soon reverted to fear - especially of illegal immigrants, where he taunted even Giuliani for being soft on "illegals". For evangelicals, suspicious of his Mormonism, he relied on another set of fears. He promised to fight to make abortion illegal and ban rights for gay couples in the constitution itself.

Mike Huckabee, Romney's chief rival in Iowa this coming Thursday, has tried another tack. His credibility as a candidate came from his being the only real true-believing fundamentalist in the field. In a Republican party remade by George Bush and Karl Rove as a religious movement, he was "one of us". His good humour and ready wit struck many as a strange confluence of Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton.

However, it was his economic message that appealed to working-class Republicans. In a world where globalisation unsettles many, Huckabee is the first Republican candidate in a long time to attack unabashedly free trade and unfettered market capitalism. Railing against Wall Street, he deftly exploited populist themes that had special power in states like Iowa. But, in the end, fear also undid him. In a dangerous world, his total cluelessness in foreign policy remains a huge liability. In the wake of chaos in Pakistan he looks like a risky bet.

On the Democratic side, John Edwards shifted his uplifting message of the 2004 election into a populist screed against the moneyed and powerful. Declaring the tax system to be rigged for the wealthy, the healthcare system cruelly indifferent to working Americans and Washington controlled by corrupt, wealthy lobbyists, he insisted that he alone was able to fight the forces arrayed against the little guy. Using the skills he finessed as a trial lawyer, and focusing almost manically on Iowa, he enters this week with surprising strength. Neither Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton has been able to consign him to the asterisk status that many expected. Most polls still show the race as a tight three-way tie.

No one has exploited the politics of fear as intuitively as Clinton. Her deepest fear has long been of Republicans. She believes deep down that they command a majority and has long practised a politics that seeks first to neutralise the enemy before attempting anything positive herself. This is the scar tissue of the Reagan and Newt Gingrich eras - with the biggest wounds her 1993 healthcare debacle and the impeachment nightmare of her husband's second term. Her biggest appeal to her party is that she can withstand the attacks from the right. And as long as they fear the Rove Republicans more than they believe in themselves, she wins.

In the battle with her fellow Democrats, she also resorts to fear of the unknown. When Obama's poll numbers equalled hers in Iowa and New Hampshire, her surrogates unleashed a torrent of negative attacks: the Republicans will eat the young Obama for breakfast; they will smear him as a former cocaine user, as a Muslim, as black.

The candidate herself, bereft of any serious policy differences with Obama, made her final pitch that she has the experience that Obama lacks. For those afraid of risk in a world at war, she is a surer bet than the young dreamer from Illinois. And if all else fails, Bill Clinton will be there - an insurance policy for the jittery.

This leaves one viable candidate on either side. They are the least afraid and the most hopeful. They are Obama and John McCain, the Republican senator and Vietnam war hero. Yes, McCain's experience has emerged as a great strength in an unstable world. But what remains impressive about his candidacy is that he has taken positions that are more forward-looking than many of his younger rivals.

McCain is the only Republican eager to address climate change. Faced with a Republican base furious about illegal immigration, he stuck to his view that illegal immigrants needed to be assimilated and even defended a bill that he authored with Ted Kennedy, the Democrat senator, to achieve this. He also bravely said that America does not need to torture prisoners and that the war in Iraq can be won. As the candidate of honour, he also became a candidate of hope - especially in Iraq. He has seen his numbers surge recently in New Hampshire and, if he can prevent Romney getting momentum, he still has a chance to pull it off.

Obama, of course, based his entire candidacy on the title of his campaign book, The Audacity of Hope. The fearful have every reason to look elsewhere. If you do not believe that a black man can be president; if you do not believe that America can risk talking to Iran's leadership or withdrawing from Iraq without losing the wider war; if you think it's naive to hope that the polarising culture war of the past 40 years can ever end; if you doubt that a man with a name like Obama who once attended a secular madrasah in Indonesia can ever win a majority of US votes, you really should vote for Clinton.

Obama knows this and directly confronts it. In the final days his appeal is disarmingly simple. "The question is, do you believe in change?" he asks. "The question is, do you believe deep in your gut we can do better than we're doing?"

There are real and powerful reasons to fear right now. It is not crazy to want the reassurance of a former president back in the White House; it is not mysterious that retrenchment is a powerful sentiment in a world of terror and globalisation and mass immigration. Americans have to make a gut decision - whether Republican or Democrat. Should they take a risk or stick to what they know? Should they dare to be optimists or rely on the pessimism that these past few years has been a good guide to a darkening world?

After following this race for an almost interminable preamble, all I can say is that I can't imagine a more constructive race than one between Obama and McCain. The odds are still against it. But it is more imaginable now than at any time in the past year.

And it reminds me of something. In Tel Aviv, a while back, a slogan began appearing on walls in graffiti. In the depths of the Arab-Israeli conflict, as optimism seemed like a delusion, it spread the way memes do. It's a simple slogan and, as this new year beckons, worth holding on to, as a few Americans in a wintry state decide in which direction to take their country.

Know hope.

By Andrew Sullivan, The Sunday Times, December 30, 2007

BOONE, Iowa - John Edwards has the practice, having placed second in the last Iowa caucuses and visited more counties than anyone else. Barack Obama has the buzz, which has translated into an unmatched volunteer army. And Hillary Clinton has the machine, a formidable alliance of the state's leading political minds and institutional backers.

The three leading Democratic presidential contenders head into the Iowa caucuses Thursday with distinct approaches to winning. But with just five days left, all their fates now hinge on the same thing: How good their painstakingly built ground organizations - the deepest and biggest in Iowa history - perform when it counts.

The extremely tight race - the most recent polls show a virtual tie among the three - means the victor will probably be the candidate not with the best stump speech but the best network of local precinct captains. Or the sharpest voter-mobilization campaign. Or the smartest baby-sitting arrange ments for caucus-goers with young children. Or perhaps even the biggest push by unions and other "independent" groups - particularly for Clinton and Edwards.

"This race has been within the margin of error for a long time," said Steve Hildebrand, Obama's deputy campaign manager, who is in Des Moines helping lead the caucus operation. "This could be decided by between 3,000 and 5,000 votes."

The campaigns expect a larger turnout than in 2004, when about 124,000 showed up at the Democratic caucuses. The candidates' fierce Iowa politicking - the speeches from flatbeds, the requisite visits to the Iowa State Fair, the endless TV ads - now gives way to more mundane work. Each campaign is focusing on essentially just two things.

The first is their "get-out-the-caucus" plan - making certain, through phone calls, home visits, e-mails, text messages, and neighborly coercion, that committed supporters will in fact show up to vote, and that they have all the road directions, rides, child care, and food that they need.

"We really don't need excuses," Hildebrand said in an interview. "We really need turnout."

Nothing is left to chance. After some Clinton supporters expressed concern about venturing out in the snow, her campaign bought 500 shovels and devised a plan to clear their paths. On Friday, the campaign packed the shovels into U-Hauls and drove them to field offices across the state.

The second crucial task is making last-minute pitches to the large number of voters who have not made up their minds. In a Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll published Friday, about one-fourth of the supporters for Clinton, Edwards, and Obama said they might vote for someone else.

Obama is personally recruiting precinct captains in rural areas where he lacks them. Every time he snags one, an aide rings a bell at Iowa headquarters in Des Moines and an office-wide cheer goes up. Obama's wife, Michelle, is scheduled to sit down with a group of undecided women tonight in Des Moines.

The leading Democratic campaigns this cycle have created the strongest and deepest political organizations Iowa has seen. They each have two to three dozen campaign offices. They have precinct captains in the vast majority of the 1,781 precincts. Their corps of thousands of aides and volunteers amount to small armies.

But each leading contender has unique advantages.

Edwards, the former North Carolina senator who surged into second place in the 2004 caucuses, is the only caucus veteran. His supporters are passionate and seasoned, and he began the 2008 race with dozens of precinct captains already in place. His campaign has what it calls a "99-county strategy," contending that Edwards enjoys strong support in rural hamlets his opponents have yet to visit. "Having a foundation that's been laid over months and months really has given us a sense of the strength we'll have on caucus night," said Jennifer O'Malley Dillon, Edwards's state director, who helped run his 2004 campaign. "Until you go through it, you don't really know what it's like."

Obama, the Illinois senator, has been running only since February, but the raw excitement his campaign has ignited has drawn legions of volunteers and zealous backers, including thousands of Iowa college and high school students whose participation could be decisive. His campaign is considered the best-organized, especially at the ground level. "They know the people are there, they just need to make sure they come out," said Jordan Oster, a 21-year-old student at Drake University in Des Moines and an Obama precinct captain.

Clinton, despite her contention that she is a new face in Iowa, has strong institutional support. Her caucus specialists are the best on the market: Teresa Vilmain, a veteran Iowa political hand; Jerry Crawford, a Des Moines power broker and long-time Democratic activist; and Michael Whouley, a ground-organization guru who guided Senator John F. Kerry to a surprise victory here in 2004. Clinton's unique appeal to women could also make the difference - women make up 60 percent of Democratic caucus-goers.

"We have a very consistent base of support," said David Barnhart, Clinton's caucus director.

Edwards and Clinton have the added benefit of politically savvy unions and other ostensibly independent advocacy groups working Iowa neighborhoods.

A battalion of Service Employees International Union activists, in addition to funding a pro-Edwards TV ad campaign, is on the ground canvassing and phone-banking for him. The American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees has between 200 and 250 people here doing the same for Clinton, while EMILY'S List, a group that works to elect Democratic women supportive of abortion rights, has a campaign to help Clinton target women who have not caucused before.

Andrew Bouska, public affairs director for AFSCME Iowa, which has 40,000 members in the state, said the union learned from the 2004 election that the most successful strategy was pairing activists with voters who shared their profession. "When you have someone who wears the same uniform as you do or deals with the same clients or the same patients, they tend to listen," Bouska said.

Obama's campaign, which lacks the same kind of institutional help, is worried that such third-party activity could be decisive.

But the bulk of the campaigns' ground work is being done by activists such as Megan Mitchell, a 22-year-old Wellesley College graduate who works in Clinton's office in Ames, a college town north of Des Moines.

On Friday morning, Mitchell set out for the nearby city of Boone, armed with Clinton bumper stickers, a stack of addresses, and a GPS unit. Her charge was to visit supporters and remind them, gently but firmly, that they needed to caucus on Thursday.

Her first stop, a house in the shadow of the Boone water tower, was a success. The man at the door said he would be there, and could even drive others. Check.

But the next hour illustrated the grueling nature of political organizing. Even when people were home, which was not often, they were not always receptive. A woman at one house said from behind the door, "I'm not dressed," forcing Mitchell to return later. A woman in an apartment complex told her pointedly to leave. A third woman said she was a Clinton supporter but was unlikely to caucus.

Clinton's campaign, like the others, emphasizes building personal relationships with potential caucus-goes, especially those who have never participated before. Her campaign mailed packets to voters with personalized nametags, to make them feel they are truly expected at their caucus.

"It's real important that people feel urgency," Barnhart said.

The leading candidates already do. They have just days left until show time.

"There are six campaigns that are all energized for one night," said Andrew Lietzow, a 56-year-old Des Moines realtor and precinct captain for Obama. "And there will be five of them that will be anywhere from moderately disappointed to really grieving."

How does Lietzow see his job Thursday night? "Herd 'em in like herding cats," he said.

By Scott Helman, The Boston Globe, December 30, 2007

It's all about delegates.

When the presidential primary season kicks off Thursday in Iowa, only 57 of more than 4,000 Democratic delegates and 40 of 2,380 Republican delegates will be at stake, but the math of delegate accumulation is already shaping distinctly different strategies for New Yorkers Hillary Rodham Clinton and Rudy Giuliani.

Sen. Clinton is following a traditional strategy of embedding herself in small early states such as Iowa and New Hampshire in an effort to grab early momentum and sweep to the nomination. If she falls short, she could face - at best - a long slog, in part because Democratic Party rules require dividing delegates proportionally to each candidate's vote in states and congressional districts.

Giuliani, on the other hand, seems wedded to a riskier strategy. Without much chance of a momentum-building win in the small, early states, he's hoping to secure the GOP nomination by grabbing big delegate chunks on Jan. 29 in Florida (which has a total of 57) and then in "Super Tuesday" prizes up for grabs on Feb. 5, relying in part on Republican rules that allow winner-take-all primaries in states such as New York (101), New Jersey (52), Connecticut (30) and Missouri (58).

On the Republican side, 1,190 delegates are needed to win the nomination. Giuliani aides say his chances are bolstered by compression of the nominating calendar, with many moderate big states - also including Illinois (70) and California (173), which allocate delegates proportionally or by congressional district - moving their primaries up to Feb. 5.

Altogether, 1,081 delegates are up for grabs on Feb. 5, and Giuliani's pollster said recently that he led in states with 40 percent of the delegates needed for the nomination. "There's never been an election like this before, where you have so many delegate-rich states coming on the heels of the early primary states, like California, like Illinois," Giuliani campaign manager Mike DuHaime argued when he laid out the strategy to reporters in November.

Experts, however, warn that no Republican has ever won the nomination without some success in the January contests. "We've got no history to rely on," said Doug Muzzio, who teaches political science at Baruch College. "We'll look back on this to see whether it works or not."

And Giuliani's recent slump in national and Florida polls make the strategy even dicier. He will be in a no man's land while the other candidates get publicity in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, and he could see support wilt further if someone else strings together enough success to build momentum, so will have to count on his foes to block each other.

"Winner-take-all certainly helps," said Dante Scala, a University of New Hampshire political scientist. "If Giuliani can pull 35 percent in some of these states he can accumulate delegates out of all proportion to the percentage of the vote he gets. But it's a campaign strategy that leaves his fate in other people's hands in the early primaries. He's a wild-card team hoping to make the playoffs if a, b, c and d happen."

For Clinton, the situation is reversed. She is competing in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina, and has long hoped to secure wins there that will develop such momentum going into Feb. 5 - when 22 states with 2,075 delegates, more than half of the Democratic total, will vote - that she will be able to end the race then. But if, instead, the results in the early primaries are mixed, and Barack Obama, John Edwards and Clinton all secure wins, all bets are off.

The Democrats, unlike the Republicans, require that all states allocate delegates proportionally among candidates based on their share of the vote. Under those rules, if three viable Democrats suddenly find themselves having to stretch staff and money across 22 states in the 10 days after South Carolina, Obama could try to poach delegates in New York, Clinton could counter in Illinois, and it would be hard for anyone to begin to approach a tipping point on delegates.

And if some second-tier candidates stayed in the race, the votes of any who fall short of the 15 percent threshold would be divided proportionally among the leaders, making a breakaway even harder. Rick Sloan - spokesman of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, the politically active union that endorses Clinton and Mike Huckabee - wrote a paper this year about what he calls the "train wreck" scenario for the party, under which all three leaders would come out of Feb. 5 with more than 500 delegates, feeling they had a plausible shot at the nomination.

"The compression of the [nominating] calendar, the proportional representation rule and the 15 percent threshold all combine to create sort of a witches brew that may make getting a clear decisive victor very, very difficult if Iowa and New Hampshire don't work as killing fields," Sloan wrote. "It's the law of unintended consequences."

Comparing the states

Voter and population demographics in some key early primary states. In some cases, data are estimated.

Michigan: Huckabee's surge has made it a three-horse race in GOP; Clinton a solid favorite for Dems.

Iowa: Liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans make this a hard-to-figure state.

New Hampshire: Key endorsements have boosted McCain; a Clinton loss would open up Democratic race.

South Carolina: Hard-fought contests in store for candidates from both parties.




By John Riley, Newsday, December 30, 2007

CLINTON, Iowa - Hillary Rodham Clinton waded into Pakistan's volatile internal political situation yesterday, raising the possibility the country's military might have assassinated Benazir Bhutto because the killing took place in the garrison city of Rawalpindi.

Clinton's remarks came as Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf's government seemed to reject a call for an independent international investigation of the murder that Clinton and John Edwards proposed on Friday.

During a question-and-answer session at an elementary school here, Clinton offered a detailed prescription for the troubled country, suggesting that the U.S divert aid away from its military to social welfare programs.

And for the second time in as many days, she cast doubt on Musharraf's contention that the suicide bombing that led to the death of the country's most popular opposition leader was masterminded by al-Qaida.

"There are those saying that al-Qaida did it. Others are saying it looked like it was an inside job - remember Rawalpindi is a garrison city," she said.

Earlier in the day, the former first lady sat down with ABC News' George Stephanopoulos and said that, as president, it wouldn't be "appropriate" for her to include Bill Clinton in top-secret security discussions.

"I think he would play the role that spouses have always played for presidents," she told the host of "This Week" in an interview to air today. "He will not have a formal official role, but just as presidents rely on wives, husbands, fathers, friends of long years, he will be my close confidante and adviser as I was with him."

Sen. Barack Obama has dismissed Hillary Clinton's White House experience as largely irrelevant. Consequently, Clinton spent much of yesterday touting her work in the 1990s on international women's rights and the negotiations that led to reconciliation between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland. "I actually went to Northern Ireland more than Bill," she said.

Clinton, who earned the endorsement yesterday of the influential Concord (N.H.) Monitor, emphasized her foreign policy experience and spoke about her 12-year relationship with Bhutto, Pakistan's former prime minister.

In August, her aides accused Obama of helping to destabilize the nuclear-armed Pakistan by suggesting he'd deploy U.S. forces in the country to hunt for Osama bin Laden.

But yesterday, Clinton delved into Pakistan's internal affairs, suggesting its "feudal landowning leadership," led by Musharraf, has protected al-Qaida to preserve its tenuous grip on power. In an interview on Friday, Clinton called for an international probe into Bhutto's assassination, saying "there was no reason to trust the Pakistani government."

An Interior Ministry spokesman rejected that suggestion yesterday, saying, "I think we are capable of handling it."

By Glenn Thrush, Newsday, December 30, 2007

DES MOINES -- At dusk Thursday, in an annex of Hillary Rodham Clinton's main Iowa campaign headquarters, dozens of operatives formed a chain loading snow shovels and boxes filled with election materials and T-shirts for precinct captains onto a fleet of rented U-Haul trucks.

The Clinton campaign is leaving nothing to chance in turning out the caucus vote for the New York senator on Thursday. And if it snows, the campaign expects its volunteers to wield shovels if that's what it takes to bring Clinton supporters to their neighborhood caucus.

If a Clinton backer needs a ride, child care, or even a buddy to help navigate the caucus process, the Clinton campaign will provide it.

The silence is deafening. So many prominent politicians, particularly Democrats, have refrained from endorsing a presidential candidate. Are they drowning in a sea of good options, or terrified of making the wrong call?

Who are the 'bundlers' financing presidential candidates?

TO WHOM will the next president be most indebted for helping to finance his or her campaign? The most accurate answer is that it is almost impossible to know. This election could end up being the first to be financed entirely with private money, if the eventual nominees choose not to take public financing. Even now, before the fourth-quarter fundraising totals come in, the presidential candidates have raised a combined $420 million. But the identities of the well-connected fundraisers who have helped haul in these big bundles, and the amounts they have brought in, remain far from clear.

Ex-President Emphasizes Wife's Experience

NASHUA, N.H. -- Former president Bill Clinton yesterday delivered in stark terms a version of his wife's central campaign message: that her experience in Washington better prepares her to "deal with the unexpected."

CLINTON, Iowa (AP) - With the governor of a key battleground state in tow, Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton raced through the final weekend before Iowa's high-stakes leadoff precinct caucuses urging activists to look past the primaries and back her because she can win in November.

Clinton and Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland stumped through vote-rich eastern Iowa making the case that the former first lady is best able to win back the White House and is ready to tackle the job once she does.

"When Governor Strickland decided to endorse me it was a great personal endorsement," said Clinton. "I think it also said something about who he believes, of all of our good Democrats running, who is best prepared to actually run and win in a state like Ohio, which we need to win to take back the White House."

"I think I know what it takes to win in Ohio," said Strickland, the state's first Democratic governor in 16 years. "She's a person of experience. Serious times call for serious candidates."

"He not only has become the first Democratic governor in 16 years, he's an incredibly popular one," said Clinton.

Speaking with reporters after her event, Clinton said the backing she's getting from political leaders has meaning.

"They are not on a political suicide mission," said Clinton. "They are professionals, they are assessing each and every one of us and they are concluding, number one, I would be the best president and, two, I am the Democrat most likely to be elected."

Most polls have shown Clinton locked in a tight and fluid race in Iowa with leading rivals Barack Obama and John Edwards just days before next Thursday's caucuses launch the presidential nominating season. Most surveys have shown a large number of Democratic activists yet to make up their minds, and electability is a key concern of many who are hungry to win back the White House after an eight-year Republican grip.

Clinton was exuding confidence with Strickland at her side.

"I look forward, as the nominee, to campaigning with him in Ohio," said Clinton. "We're going to win Ohio and I believe that we're going to win a lot of states that haven't been as friendly a territory to Democratic presidential candidates in the last several years."

Making her case to about 300 activists at a high school in Clinton, the former first lady made it clear her role in the White House was one of a player.

"I was privileged to be a part of a lot of the decisions we made," said Clinton.

Clinton's closing argument to activists couples her argument that she can win with the case she makes that her record of achievement is strongest.

"When the campaigning is over, how do you make the decision?" Clinton asked. "I believe the best way to make that decision is to look at the evidence. If you want to know what I'll do as president, the best evidence is what I've done."

Clinton was pointing to the backing she's gotten from fellow senators and governors like Strickland as evidence that practicing politicians have made the assessment she's best able to win.

"I have people across this country who have been elected in tough states for Democrats," said Clinton. "They know how to win and they believe that I am the best person to win for Democrats."

Much of Clinton's claim of experience lies in her eight years as first lady, and she makes the case to activists that they were better off during her husband's tenure, and rejects the argument that she was asking voters to turn back the clock.

"It's not like I'm talking about ancient history, I'm not talking about the 15th Century," Clinton said. "We were on the right track and then it was all squandered."

Since the assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, Clinton has woven into her stump speech the argument that she's by far the most experienced Democrat to deal with a troubled and dangerous world.

"I was privileged to travel around the world on your behalf," said Clinton. "The best way to guard against extremism and violence and conflict is to build alliances and relationships."

Clinton was taking the high road during the final weekend, avoiding references to her rivals.

"On Jan. 20, 2009, someone will be sworn in at high noon to be president," said Clinton. "We know some of the challenges that will await the next president. No matter how much we think we know today, we can't possibly predict everything that will happen."

By Mike Glover, Associated Press, December 29, 2007

CLINTON, Iowa -- Any presidential candidate likes to campaign with the governor by her side. But the governor at Hillary Rodham Clinton's side today was not Iowa's. It was Ohio's.

Subtle? Not even close. The message: Nominate me and I'll win next fall in Ohio, the state that cost Democrats the 2004 election. "Iowa may be the most important first state," Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland said here before introducing Clinton. "And Ohio may be the most important general election state."

Strickland's presence is Clinton's electability argument for the day as Iowa voters ponder whether she would be the Democrat best able to win a general election despite her high negative ratings in the polls. Strickland told the crowds in Iowa today that Clinton is leading Ohio polls. "I would not have endorsed her, in spite of all the respect I have for her, were it not for the fact that I am convinced she is the candidate who can win in November 2008," he said.

Taking questions from reporters at an earlier stop in Eldridge, Clinton said the support of so many elected Democrats across the country bolstered her argument. "They are not on a political suicide mission," she said. "They are professionals. They are assessing each and every one of us. And they are concluding, number one, I would be the best president and two, I am the Democrat most likely to be elected."

Here in a town with at least a friendly name, Clinton dismissed -- without naming them -- her main rivals, Sen. Barack Obama and former senator John Edwards, both of whom came through yesterday. She portrayed them both as people who had never really accomplished anything. "What really matters is: What have you done?" she said. "What have you done that has made a difference in people's lives other than your own?" she asked. "I'm not asking you to take me on faith. I'm not asking you to take a leap of faith."

She seemed to be mocking Obama in particular here when she sarcastically talked about how nice it would be to offer gauzy dreams and promise to bring everyone together and "feel so happy." She added, "I guess I've lived long enough and read enough of history, read the Bible, to know that's not the way things happen."

By Peter Baker, The Washington Post, December 29, 2007

PORTSMOUTH, N.H.--With Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) going from county to county in Iowa, former President Bill Clinton addressed three overflow crowds in New Hampshire on Saturday, calling his wife a "a world-class change agent" who can win the general election.

In a policy-heavy speech that weaved in the accomplishments of his presidency, Bill Clinton urged voters to back his wife over her Democratic rivals in the Granite State primary on Jan. 8.

"I want you to know that I believe that if you vote for Hillary in the primary, she'll come out of here and win in South Carolina and Nevada," he told an audience in Portsmouth, N.H., following events in Dover and Nashua.

The former president called the current contest for the Democratic White House nomination "an immensely rewarding and taxing situation", drawing a contrast from his 1992 bid for his party's nomination, in which he conceded Iowa to Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) before going on to perform strongly in the New Hampshire primary.

Clinton praised his wife's rivals, mentioning several by name, but not her main opponent, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.). "I like all these people, I respect them and you should too," he said.

Yet he stressed that his wife stands out from the pack, arguing that she is the most prepared to handle the unexpected events that can hit a country, giving the September 11, 2001 terror attacks and Hurricane Katrina as examples.

"I consider her the best candidate that I've had a chance to vote for in a Democratic primary in my lifetime," he told the crowd.

New Hampshire, once seemingly safely in Clinton's hands, has become increasingly contested. Obama led Clinton by two percentage points in the state, according to an LA Times/Bloomberg poll conducted over Christmas. The same pollster gave Clinton a 19-point lead over Obama in September.

Speaking in a former Baptist church, Bill Clinton enumerated the qualities needed in a U.S. president, citing vision and "the proven ability" to turn that vision "into positive improvements in people's lives."

The former president listed Clinton's achievements as first lady of Arkansas and, later, as the country's first lady.

At times the speech had the trappings of a Clinton State of the Union address, heavy on his own accomplishments and peppered with detailed policy proposals.

He boasted about his administration's record, saying he created 22.7 million jobs "in our eight years" compared with 5.3 million so far under President Bush.

Later, touching on clean energy, he gestured to the ceiling of the church.

"You could green this roof, go up and put on sod," he said.

He announced that The Concord Monitor would endorse Clinton in its Sunday paper.

"Last time they endorsed somebody in my family in 1992, it worked out pretty well," he said.

By Jessica Holzer, The Hill, December 29, 2007

WASHINGTON - The harbingers were practically etched into the rocky bluffs of Selma, Ala., in March, when Hillary Rodham Clinton's SUV caravan pulled into town for the annual celebration of the 1960s civil rights movement.

On that chilly day, the Democratic Party's prohibitive favorite joined Barack Obama to deliver dueling sermons in drafty churches barely a block apart. After the speeches had ended, a pair of dumbstruck Clinton aides watched as the predominantly African-American crowds flocked from the churches, dividing equally between the first-term Illinois senator and the former first lady, who was accompanied by Bill Clinton -- his mock title as "the first black president" suddenly imperiled.

"I guess we've got ourselves a race," one of the aides muttered, peering down on a tableau that belied the campaign's message of Clinton's invincibility.

It took Obama the better part of a year to tear down Clinton's facade of certainty -- even his supporters jokingly called him "Obambi" because he seemed awed by Clinton at times. But he pounced on Clinton's disastrous showing at a late October debate in Philadelphia, shedding his passivity and tapping into pent up hostility toward the front-runner.

"I don't know what else Clinton's people could have done but put on the inevitability mantle, but they did take Obama for granted," said Tom Bevan, co-founder of the widely read Realclearpolitics.com Web site. "That mistake, I think, has largely determined the course of the campaign."

The Clinton-Obama parity first on display in Selma has become the dominant reality of the race, spreading to Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina -- a trio of neck-and-neck January contests that could determine the outcome of the Democratic primary.

Even John Edwards remains a factor, especially in Iowa where he has a strong statewide organization. The former North Carolina senator, who has waged an aggressive campaign despite his wife's renewed cancer diagnosis, is hoping to leverage a Hawkeye State victory into wins in the next two primaries, where his support remains in the teens.

So how can Clinton recover? Shorn of her air of inevitability, she has spent weeks groping for a coherent message, and only recently hit on a hybrid theme her campaign believes is a winner. Some backers jokingly call it the "Mama Bear" approach, emphasizing Clinton's toughness and experience, while using friends and family to melt her Ice Queen image and demonstrate her commitment to change.

Clinton, who still holds a nearly 20 percent advantage in national polls despite slipping into statistical ties in the three early states, has indeed seemed like her party's inevitable candidate for much of the year. Throughout the summer she built up her lead to double-digits in Iowa and New Hampshire, largely on the strength of her debate performances, which even opponents praised.

She was especially impressive at the first-of-the-campaign debate in South Carolina in April when Clinton said she would respond to new terror attacks on U.S. cities "as swiftly as is prudent to retaliate." Obama, by contrast, stumbled, saying he'd investigate before doing anything.

By fall, however, the campaign hit some serious potholes: The Norman Hsu fundraising scandal, controversies over the Clintons' limited release of White House records and, finally, Clinton's muddled and contradictory positions on Gov. Eliot Spitzer's ill-fated plan to award driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.

Clinton was also bedeviled by an avalanche of unexpected problems inside her campaign, including tactical misfires (a news release claiming that Obama had penned a kindergarten essay touting his presidential ambitions), serious strategic disagreements (a protracted fight about whether to seriously contest Iowa), below-the-belt shots at Obama (her New Hampshire co-chairman questioned if Obama dealt cocaine) and internal bickering reminiscent of her husband's White House.

Most disconcerting to Clinton's own supporters were the times when the otherwise confident campaign brain trust seemed confused and disoriented, particularly as they tried to limit the damage.

"At times, it seemed like they had a different message every day," said a prominent New York supporter.

But Clinton, whom Karl Rove once described as "brittle," has also shown resiliency. She kicked her fundraising apparatus into high gear after Obama collected a startling $25.8 million during the first three months of 2007. But the third quarter, she has reasserted her fundraising dominance, beating Obama by a $28 million to $20 million margin.

Then there was Clinton's apparently successful navigation of her Iraq problem. To the amazement of Obama's handlers, Clinton has managed to dodge the fallout from her October 2002 vote for the Iraq war, which fueled much early opposition to her candidacy.

By gradually shifting her rhetoric from tepid support for the war in late 2005 to fiery opposition to the Bush administration's troop surge, she has managed to diffuse some of that hostility -- even as she supports a residual U.S. presence in Iraq.

But at the Philadelphia debate it all seemed to fall apart for Team Clinton when a series of gaffes cascaded into a full-scale collapse of the inevitability argument.

During that period, Clinton tried a variety of approaches, many that backfired, including a widely criticized attempt to suggest sexism at the root of the attacks on her. For a time, Clinton took aim at Obama personally, attacking his "present" votes in the Illinois state Senate, saying her newfound aggression heralded the "fun part" of the campaign.

But earlier this month, the campaign rolled out the kinder, gentler approach, which many in the campaign credit for stemming Clinton's slide, particularly among Iowa Democrats, who disdain negative campaigning.

"Within the last couple of weeks they've settled on a single message that's just a lot more comfortable for them and it shows. They're doing a lot better," said a top Clinton donor.

Still, Clinton's main problem is her principal asset -- her unshakable Hillaryness. The former first lady, a polarizing politician with negatives and positives in the 40-percent range nationally, has been called upon to defend her front-runner status for a year. That's the longest period any non-incumbent has had to do so in a competitive race.

"The notion of a front-runner is obsolete in American politics," said Robert Zimmerman, a Clinton campaign donor and Democratic National Committee member from Long Island. "There was this false perception that she was the front-runner. Nobody's a front-runner until they're out of Iowa and New Hampshire."

By Glenn Thrush, Newsday, December 30, 2007

DES MOINES, Iowa-Iowa could make or break a Democratic candidate on Thursday. The question is, who?

While the state has long played a key role in choosing the Democratic presidential nominee, it has unparalleled influence this year, even after several larger states moved up their contests to try and muscle in. Those efforts have done little more than compress the calendar into a five-week sprint that ends with the multistate primary Feb. 5 -- strengthening Iowa's position as the leadoff caucus state rather than diminishing it.

Even New Hampshire, which holds the first primary of the season, has seen its once-mighty position diminished somewhat by Iowa's outsized role this time.

Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards are locked in a tight three-way contest in Iowa just days before voters attend their precinct caucuses on Thursday. And while all three have strong organizations in other early states, the best laid plans in those places could come apart depending on what happens in Iowa.

Only Obama and Clinton have raised enough campaign cash to be sure of being competitive through Feb. 5 and beyond. Edwards has agreed to accept federal matching funds, which will constrain the amount of money he is allowed to spend in each state.

Trailing in the polls, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden and Chris Dodd have also concentrated nearly all their resources in Iowa in hopes of scoring an upset.

The impact of unexpected news events, such as the assassination of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan, may further complicate a fluid situation.

Here's a look at what to expect in the next several weeks:

------

IOWA -- Jan 3 (45 pledged delegates)

All six major Democratic candidates will blitz the state before next Thursday's caucuses. Hundreds of staff and volunteers from each campaign will flood likely caucus goers with mail, visits and phone calls. The television airwaves have been saturated for weeks with advertising.

Clinton, who has struggled in Iowa despite leading the field in national and most other state polls, has the most riding on the outcome here. A win could fuel a wave of momentum for the former first lady, while a loss, particularly to Obama, would shatter the notion of inevitability she has tried to project.

The New York senator is barnstorming the state and has deployed dozens of surrogates including her husband, former President Bill Clinton. Her closing argument -- "It's time to pick a president" -- underscores her central message: A candidate like Obama may inspire and move voters, but Clinton is the best prepared to actually do the job.

Obama and Edwards are competing to be the strongest "anti-Clinton" candidate in the field. Both are promising to bring fundamental change to Washington.

Edwards' base of support lies with caucus goers who were with him when he ran for president in 2004. Obama and Clinton are competing for newcomers -- hers are mostly older and female, his are younger and male.

Spending by outside groups has added a new dimension to the contest. EMILY'S List, AFSCME and the American Federation of Teachers are coordinating to boost Clinton through mail, TV and phone banks, while Edwards is receiving assistance from labor-backed groups headed by his 2004 campaign manager.

Obama has called on Edwards to ask the groups to cease their work in Iowa, and privately Obama's advisers fret that he is being hurt by the influx of spending on the other candidates' behalf.

------

NEW HAMPSHIRE -- Jan. 8 (22 pledged delegates)

The candidates are reinforcing their organizations in New Hampshire to prepare for whatever verdict Iowa delivers.

The Clinton campaign, which had long counted on the state to be its firewall in the event of a less-than-stellar Iowa showing, has scrambled as her lead here has all but evaporated. The situation was further roiled when a prominent New Hampshire supporter, Bill Shaheen, stepped down as a campaign co-chairman after raising concerns about Obama's teenage drug use.

But Clinton has strong ties to the state thanks to her husband's 1992 and 1996 campaigns. Her organization numbers several hundred staff and volunteers in New Hampshire, methodically working phones and canvassing.

Obama strategists say the key to victory in the state lies with independents who can vote in either the Democratic or Republican primary and who polls show strongly oppose the Iraq war. The campaign is counting on a strong showing among these voters but is targeting traditional Democrats as well, making about 20,000 calls a night.

The Edwards campaign says it has four times the staff in New Hampshire that he had in 2004, when he finished a disappointing fourth. The campaign says its volunteers have knocked on 235,000 doors in the state, where 220,000 people voted in the primary four years ago.

------

MICHIGAN -- Jan. 15 (128 pledged delegates; national party says the state will lose them all)

The Democratic candidates have agreed not to compete in Michigan because the state moved the date of its primary in violation of party rules. The Democratic National Committee has penalized the state by stripping all its delegates, but the eventual nominee may choose to restore the delegates prior to the convention next August.

------

NEVADA -- Jan. 19 (25 pledged delegates)

Nevada will be the first state with delegates at stake after the New Hampshire primary and could play an important role if the race is still competitive coming out of Northeast.

While party leaders estimate only about 40,000 voters will take part in Nevada's caucuses, all the major candidates have spent considerable resources here in hopes of securing a win among a Western, heavily Hispanic electorate.

The campaigns are all counting on momentum and strong organization to fuel their efforts here. The candidates are basing their organization on an Iowa caucus model, building relationships precinct by precinct.

Richardson has spent more time here than any other candidate, hoping to parlay his Hispanic heritage and proximity as governor of neighboring New Mexico into a strong showing.

All the campaigns are vigorously competing for the backing of the Culinary Union, which represents some 60,000 service workers along the Las Vegas strip. The union will announce an endorsement in early January.

------

SOUTH CAROLINA -- Jan. 26 (45 pledged delegates)

The three top-tier candidates have grounds to lay claim to South Carolina -- Obama and Clinton because of their popularity among black voters, Edwards because he was born in the state and won its primary four years ago.

Clinton and Obama have strong organizations in the state and have begun sustained television advertising recently. Both have made a concerted effort to woo black voters, who were 50 percent of primary voters in the state last time; they've run ads on black radio and sought endorsements from community leaders and black legislators.

Edwards has run television ads here since November and has made more campaign visits than Obama or Clinton. Polls show him running a distant third but slowly gaining ground.

------

FLORIDA -- Jan. 29 (185 pledged delegates, may be lost)

Like Michigan, Florida has been penalized for moving its primary in violation of party rules. The national party has stripped the state of its delegates, and the candidates have pledged not to campaign in the state, although they have made several fundraising visits.

------

MEGA TUESDAY -- Feb. 5 (At least 20 states and 2,075 pledged delegates)

Contests from Connecticut to California on this day could end up determining the Democratic nominee.

Clinton has seen her lead diminish somewhat in California, whose 441 delegates represent the day's largest prize. But the campaign is running generally strong there and is targeting absentee voters who can begin casting ballots Jan. 8.

The campaign is also building organizations in states holding caucuses on Feb. 5, including Minnesota, Colorado and Kansas.

Obama has bolstered efforts in California, and polls show him running strong in Georgia and Missouri. He's strongest in his home state of Illinois, while Clinton is dominant in her home state of New York and in nearby New Jersey.

By Beth Fouhy, Associated Press, December 29, 2007

DES MOINES, Iowa (AFP) - White House candidates battled across snow piled prairies and airwaves saturated with attacks ads Saturday, five days before Iowa activists make their picks in the first 2008 nominating contests.

Tensions hit new heights between Democratic foes Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, while the tone of the Republican contest took another negative lurch, as eight party hopefuls blitzed the midwestern state hosting Thursday's caucuses.

Campaigns, which have waged the longest, most expensive race on record for wide-open 2008 party nominations, geared up to tear down rivals, plead final cases to Iowans and oiled huge get-out-the-vote operations.

Republican Mitt Romney overtaken in an Iowa poll surge by folksy Baptist preacher Mike Huckabee, opened a two front war by hammering Senator John McCain, who is on the rise in New Hampshire which votes January 8. "McCain championed a bill to let every illegal immigrant stay in America permanently," the ad warned, hitting the Arizona senator for backing an ill-fated Senate bill which provided a long path to citizenship for illegals.

Illegal immigration is a boiling issue for Republicans, and helped drive down McCain this year. Recently though, the 71-year-old has been rising again, prompting one Iowa columnist Saturday to dub him "The Comeback Codger."

Polls show Romney, who needs wins in both early voting states trails Huckabee in Iowa and is under fierce pressure from McCain in New Hampshire.

Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor, hopes to capitalize on discontent among 2008 challengers with the Republican field, particularly among evangelical Christian voters who helped elect George W. Bush.

Victory in Iowa would be a "seismic political event" he said Friday, claiming multi-millionaire businessman Romney had outspent him 20 to one, in a state renowned for its kingmaker potential.

Clinton and Obama meanwhile set off on gruelling new daylong bus tours across Iowa's icy highways, touting their duelling visions of political change, the issue on which the Democratic race is turning.

John Edwards, the 2004 vice presidential nominee locked in a deadheat with the two senators in Iowa, meanwhile planned an evening rally in state capitol Des Moines after a punishing swing through Democratic districts in east Iowa.

The battle between Clinton and Obama degenerated Friday over a remark by the 46-year-old Illinois senator about how his foreign policy spurs had not been earned by taking "teas with diplomats" -- an apparent swipe at Clinton.

The Clinton camp hit back with a statement from former secretary of state Madeleine Albright saying the former first lady had represented the United States in refugee camps, clinics, orphanages, and villages all around the world, including places where "tea is not the usual drink."

The two camps had also sparred over their response to the assassination of ex-Pakistani premier Benazir Bhutto, which was seized on by candidates to show leadership spurs and experience on the world stage.

By Stephen Collinson, AFP, December 29, 2007

America's presidential race kicks off on Thursday with Democrat and Republican supporters in Iowa voting for their party's candidate.

I am in the gift shop of an art gallery in Iowa's capital city, Des Moines. Why an art gallery, you may ask?

Iowa is a farming state but this is not the hard scrabble life of depression-era US farmers. Iowa is not a poor state. Farmland has doubled in value in the last eight years and Iowan corn is being turned into the oil alternative ethanol as fast as it can be coaxed out of the ground.

Although Des Moines is not quite Dubai, it does have a wealthy feel - there are galleries, cappuccino bars and fancy restaurants.

Lost innocence

The staff in this art gallery shop have left the phone on speaker when a call comes in: "Hiya," a female voice says, "it's Michelle here, Barack Obama's wife. I'm just calling to say..."

With a practised, almost laconic deftness, an assistant reaches out her arm and ends the call, all the while serving a customer.

Iowans have lost their innocence, and lost it big time.

A professor at a university in Des Moines tells me a story about a friend of his who came home late one night when the campaigns had only just begun and found a message from Barack Obama himself on the answer machine.

"Hi it's Barack Obama here - I got your number from a friend, and, well, I just wondered if there was any chance you might be able to help me out with this running for president thingy," the message ran.

The friend was thrilled and spent days day dreaming about the size of his White House office once the campaign was over and his part in it had been properly recognised.

Then the ghastly truth dawned - Mr Obama had left the same message for 200,000 other Iowans who drove a hybrid car, or owned a bicycle, or ate out twice a week or whatever it was that attracted them to the Obama camp.

Nowadays, the "robocalls" are universally resented here as an unreasonable intrusion.

It would not surprise me if, on Christmas Day, some campaigns had at least toyed with idea of calling on behalf of opposing candidates in order to foster festive ill-will.

Chit-chat

The point is that Iowa is not about mass politics. It is a celebration of the one-to-one relationship between an individual American and his or her putative commander-in-chief.

Almost two years ago I wrote a piece for this programme about meeting one of the Republican front runners, Mitt Romney, in Iowa.

I was one of two reporters who sat down with him for a sandwich lunch. That could not happen now. I would have more chance of getting an informal off-the-record chat with the Pope than I would with Mitt.

Unless, that is, I were an Iowan.

Iowans have dozens, literally dozens, of opportunities each week to meet all the candidates and often to talk to them.

They are in diners, in hotel lobbies, in churches, in schools, in hospitals.

Iowa in campaign season is like a single British rural parliamentary constituency - think Ross and Cromarty - with everyone spending all their time campaigning there.

The result is dizzying. A great US political story has two voters chatting about their choices in one of the early voting states - Iowa or New Hampshire, I think.

One asks the other about whether he likes a particular candidate, "Oh I don't know," comes the reply, "I've only met him twice!"

Cutting the mustard

Occasionally, there are moves to de-throne Iowa or reduce its importance.

Why should our presidential election be so heavily influenced, other Americans sometimes ask, by 100,000 or so people who actually turn up to the Iowa caucuses, most of them white and most of them over 55?

The honest answer is that Iowa and New Hampshire, and the other handful of early votes, for all their unfairness, at least give the system a connection with local communities.

However grand a presidential candidate, he or she has to come to Iowa and cut the mustard.

They have to talk about the intricacies of their Iraq policy with farmers.

These high achievers have to pause to hear about the health worries of depressed single mums waiting tables in dusty diners on the long, straight, empty roads of the Midwest - they have to talk face to face to the kinds of people you see in Edward Hopper paintings, people whose highest achievement is just getting by.

Hillary Clinton, the best-known of the hopefuls this year, made a classic error early on in the race.

She went to a diner and talked to the waitress but when she left, her tip was given by her staff to the manager to be handed out later.

Bad mistake. You could do that in New York but in Des Moines you hand the money to the server and you look them in the eye.

The waitress complained and Hillary got a black eye.

If she loses on Thursday - which she might well do - put it down to the curse of Iowa, on those who cannot connect.

By Justin Webb, BBC News, December 29, 2007

Hopefuls Descend To Win Over Undecided Voters And Gain Momentum As Voting Season Begins

STORY CITY, Iowa (CBS News) - As a light snow fell outside, Hillary Clinton stood in an overflowing Iowa elementary school gymnasium on Friday and made a case for why she should be the Democratic nominee for president.

"Some people think you get change by demanding it, some people think you get change by hoping for it," she said, in a shot at her two main rivals, Barack Obama and John Edwards. "I think you get change by working really, really hard for it every single day."

With the Jan. 3 caucuses less than a week away and no clear frontrunner having emerged in either party, virtually all of the major candidates - along with a fair share of campaign workers and media - will be working hard every single day between now and Thursday.

Among the presidential hopefuls campaigning in Iowa are Clinton, Edwards, Obama, Joe Biden, Bill Richardson, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, and Fred Thompson. Some are cramming up to five events per day into their schedules in an effort to woo undecided voters.

And a win isn't necessarily what they're looking for. The real goal in the state, according to Huckabee's Iowa campaign manager Eric Woolson, is to exceed expectations. "It's not winning, it's having the media decide you're the winner, you're the surprise," says Woolson. "In March, when [Huckabee] was at less than 1 percent, I was saying to people we need to finish in the top three, and everyone laughed because we were in 9th place. Now when I say the same thing everybody laughs at me because we're expected to win."

Huckabee sits atop polls of likely GOP caucus-goers in the state, followed closely by Romney, who has been running ads critical of the former Arkansas governor's positions in an effort to close the gap. The former Massachusetts governor has held more than 200 events with voters in Iowa, according to Romney regional spokesperson Sarah Pompei.

"We've made no secret of our strategy to do well in the early states," she says.

Huckabee has moved much of his staff to Iowa, and he has benefited from the backing of home-schooling and pastors organizations in a state where 40 percent of likely GOP caucus-goers are evangelicals. Romney has stressed his position on illegal immigration in his Iowa advertisements and appearances, an issue that tops the list of concerns of the state's likely GOP caucus-goers.

Ron Paul, Giuliani, Thompson and McCain are all hoping for a finish in third place or better in the state, which would give them momentum heading into the New Hampshire primary on January 8th.

"Third or better would catapult us - it would start the revolution, as we say," says Jeff Jared, Paul's special projects coordinator in Iowa.

Clinton's campaign, meanwhile, is downplaying its candidate's chances in the state, where polls show the former first lady in a virtual tie with Edwards and Obama.

"Senator Clinton has said that Iowa is going to be her toughest state," says Mark Daley, Clinton's Iowa communications director. "She has never participated or campaigned here before and she isn't from a neighboring state."

Edwards' Iowa spokesman, Dan Leistikow, says the campaign is satisfied with where the Iowa race stands now. Some commentators have suggested that Edwards has focused on disproportionately on Iowa, but Leistikow argues otherwise. "We've spent the exact same number of days here as Obama and just a few more than Clinton," he says. "And they have put three times as much into television ads."

Obama's Iowa communications director, Josh Earnest, also sought to counter what he says is a misconception - that his candidate is dependent on college students returning from their winter breaks to help him to victory. "The polls are not polling college students," says Earnest, who argues that any boost the Obama campaign gets from college students will simply be a bonus. "There's no secret. This is about fundamentals. If you have the organization, and the volunteers, and the message, you're going to have a robust turnout operation."

At the Clinton event in Story City, Iowan Mary Harris said she had come to see whom she might support if her favored candidate, Joe Biden, is not viable at her caucus. At a Democratic caucus, a candidate needs to earn 15 percent support; if he does not, his supporters must choose another candidate. Second-choice preferences can be crucial in Iowa, a state with less than 3 million people and a 2004 caucus turnout of less than 6 percent of eligible voters.

"If I have to have a second choice on caucus night, I'm still undecided," says Harris. 40 percent of likely caucus-goers say they have yet to even settle on a first choice.

"It's close on both sides," says Arthur Sanders, the chair of the department of politics at Drake University in Des Moines. "There isn't any real way of knowing whose organizations are going to be most effective, and the January 3rd date presents problems that nobody has had to deal with before."

Among those problems are a nationally televised college football game, college students in the middle of their vacations, and the proximity to the New Year's holiday.

"You want about 48 hours where you can mobilize your people, but that's New Year's Day," says Sanders. "Everything's compressed. At the time you should be beginning your really hard push, you've got to delay things. Nobody knows what kind of impact that will have."





By Brian Montopoli, CBS News, December 29, 2007

DAVENPORT, Iowa (Reuters)- Hillary Clinton has one. Barack Obama, Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney too. Each contender in the presidential race has some special line about family, or faith, or war-time sacrifice - some turn of phrase that consistently strikes a chord with crowds.

These slogans vary widely depending on which audience the candidate is seeking to attract, but all are designed to stir emotions and win votes in the crucial days before the January 3 Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary five days later.

Often, the key lines win whoops and hollers, spontaneous ovations and the occasional "Oh Yeah!," indicating that the top Democratic and Republican contenders for their party's presidential nominations are connecting with voters.

For Democrats, favorite phrases often include swipes at President George W. Bush, while Republicans win ovations for references to religion and strengthening family values.

New York Sen. Hillary Clinton, seeking to become the first female U.S. president, struck gold with a comment she made at a stop at the fairgrounds Friday afternoon in Webster City, Iowa:

"The cronyism, the corruption, I am just fed up with it. We can do so much better. We can have a transparent open government, not a government of the few, by the few and for the few, but a government for every American. I am going to start with an old fashioned idea. How about appointing qualified people for the jobs we ask them to hold in the United States government?"

In contrast, the crowd attending a rally in Sergeant Bluff for former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney ate up the Republican's comments about Clinton: "Putting government in charge, putting 'Hillarycare' in place, would be the worst thing imaginable for our health care system," Romney said, to roars from the crowd. Another proven applause-getter for Romney: "There's no work in America that's more important to our future than the work that goes on in the four walls of the American home."

Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, seeking to become the first black U.S. president, fired up his crowds this week with pledges to fight corporate lobbyists in Washington and to end divisive politicking.

"LIGHT, NOT HEAT"

"There's no shortage of anger and bluster and bitter partisanship out there," Obama told his crowds. "We don't need more heat. We need more light." But Obama's best lines, measured in cheers and standing ovations at a series of campaign events this week: "We will end this war in Iraq. We will close Guantanamo. You will have a president who believes in the Constitution and supports the Constitution and obeys the Constitution of the United States of America.

Crowds are usually more subdued at campaign events for Republican Mike Huckabee, the former Baptist minister who typically opens - and sometimes closes -- his events with a prayer. On Friday night in Ottumwa, about 80 miles southeast of Des Moines, a Huckabee pledge to put the IRS out of business drew loud clapping, and the crowd roared its approval when he said that "small business people are the backbone of the country."

David Axelrod, senior strategist for the Obama campaign, said "take-away" lines are key. "I think that is essential," Axelrod said. "You want to make key points that people will take away and remember when they vote."

By Carey Gillam, Reuters, December 29, 2007

National security quickly reemerges from the shadows of domestic issues on the campaign trail. The slaying could play to the strengths of Giuliani, McCain and Clinton.

DES MOINES -- On Wednesday, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton warned Iowa's Democratic voters to consider which presidential candidate was best equipped to confront "unpredictable" problems in an uncertain world.

About 24 hours later, the unpredictable happened.

Whether the assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto will prompt voters to reconsider which candidate should lead the country is unclear. But it is clear that some campaigns think when the debate turns to foreign policy and dangers from abroad, their candidates benefit and others suffer.

Clinton and Republicans John McCain and Rudolph W. Giuliani are seen by Iowa and New Hampshire voters as having the best credentials to deal with national security issues.

In Iowa, Clinton is trying to focus voter attention on the job of the presidency, hoping to heighten that advantage.

The New York senator named her final trip through the state before Thursday's caucuses "Big Challenges, Real Solutions: Time to Pick a President Tour" -- an attempt to shift the discussion away from whether she is likable, the one quality in which she lags behind her chief rivals.

"With the assassination of Benazir Bhutto today, the world once again is reminded of the dangers facing those who pursue democracy and free elections in Pakistan and elsewhere in areas that are rife with conflict and violence and extremism and anti-democratic forces at work," Clinton said. She said later that the events in Pakistan "are a stark reminder of how important it is for as many Iowans as possible to be part of charting our country's future."

On the Republican side, the crisis in Pakistan helps McCain and Giuliani shift the focus to their strengths -- and away from the domestic concerns such as social issues, immigration and taxes that have benefited former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

Coincidentally, the crisis in Pakistan coincided with a new Giuliani television ad in which the former New York mayor discusses his leadership after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. And Giuliani was quick to issue a statement Thursday calling the incident a "reminder that terrorism anywhere -- whether in New York, London, Tel Aviv or Rawalpindi -- is an enemy of freedom."

McCain, a Vietnam veteran and Arizona senator with years of experience on the Senate Armed Services Committee, was the most blunt of any candidate in assessing the political meaning of the Bhutto assassination. Appearing at an Elks Lodge near Des Moines, he repeatedly mentioned his knowledge of the region. He noted that he had traveled to the remote area on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border believed to be harboring terrorists, such as Osama bin Laden, and said he had had a rapport with Bhutto and has one with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf. "My theme has been throughout this campaign that I am the one with the experience, the knowledge and the judgment," McCain said. "So perhaps [the assassination] may serve to enhance those credentials or make people understand that I've been to Waziristan, I know Musharraf, I can pick up the phone and call him."

McCain's words resonated with Mark Nemmers, a 51-year-old Republican who had planned to back Huckabee -- until the assassination. Now he is taking a serious look at McCain. "I didn't expect the Pakistan thing to take the turn that it did, but now that it has it changes the whole picture," said Nemmers, who lives in the Des Moines suburb of Urbandale. "It represents a great deal of unrest for the world, and I think the next president we need is one who can deal with this unrest."

McCain also said he would "hate for anything like this to be the cause of any political game for anybody."

But when asked whether his rivals could deal with such a crisis, McCain did not shy away from striking a contrast.

He noted that Romney "doesn't have any experience there" and said that, although Giuliani performed well after Sept. 11, "I don't know how that provides one credentials to address national security issues."

McCain's comments could boost his hopes in Iowa, where he trails Romney and Huckabee. He wins the highest marks when Republican voters who plan to attend the caucuses are asked who would be best at fighting terrorism and protecting national security -- with 30% naming McCain, 14% Huckabee and 11% Romney, according to a new Times/Bloomberg poll.

The survey showed a similar advantage among Iowa Democrats for Clinton, who was judged as best by 36% -- compared with 21% who picked former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards and 19% who picked Illinois Sen. Barack Obama.

The turn of events could be particularly troublesome for Obama, who has gained ground in recent weeks thanks to missteps by Clinton that have raised questions about her authenticity and likability.

The former first lady had been strongest in the summer and early fall when she was able to paint the first-term senator as "naive" on foreign affairs. And she has long scored high marks from likely Democratic voters as the best qualified to end the war in Iraq -- even though she has refused to recant her vote to authorize the war.

Obama aides sought Thursday to neutralize any benefit to Clinton -- and turn the focus to the type of character question that polls show benefits Obama.

Following a Thursday morning speech by the Illinois senator, Obama advisor David Axelrod told reporters that Clinton had voted for a war that distracted the U.S. from Pakistan and Afghanistan and emboldened Al Qaeda, which he said might have been responsible for Bhutto's death.

"That's a judgment she'll have to defend," Axelrod said.

His comment drew a furious response from a Clinton spokesman, Jay Carson, who accused the Obama campaign of politicizing the Bhutto assassination.

Most candidates chose their words carefully to avoid appearing overly political in a time of tragedy.

But each tried to sound authoritative and knowledgeable and, in some cases, personally close to Bhutto -- even those who do not enjoy the same advantages as Clinton and McCain.

Huckabee, who leads the GOP field in Iowa, stumbled a bit when, speaking in Florida, he appeared not to realize that Musharraf had lifted martial law under U.S. pressure this month.

Edwards had more success: He reached Musharraf by phone and told reporters that he had encouraged him to go ahead with parliamentary elections scheduled for January.





By Peter Wallsten, Los Angeles Times, December 28, 2007

WEBSTER CITY, Iowa - For the presidential candidates, the assassination of Benazir Bhutto has emerged as a ghoulish sort of test: a chance to project leadership and competence - or not - on a fast-moving and nuanced foreign policy issue.

Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware and Gov. Bill Richardon of New Mexico, Democrats who have struggled to attract voters' attention, edged into the spotlight on Friday after talking about Pakistan for weeks.

Mr. Biden tried to sound presidential as he expressed concern about loose nuclear weapons in Pakistan, and he also emphasized his foresight by noting that he had long called Pakistan "the most dangerous nation on the planet."

Mr. Richardson, a former diplomat, made an effort to cast himself as a man of action, meanwhile, calling for President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan to step down.

Senators John McCain, Republican of Arizona, and Hillary Rodham Clinton, Democrat of New York, spent the day asserting their own personal expertise: their private conversations with Ms. Bhutto and Mr. Musharraf, their visits to Pakistan and their concerns about fallout affecting the nation's nuclear arsenal to the hunt for Osama bin Laden.

Mr. McCain, speaking in New Hampshire, also sought to convey leader-to-leader chemistry when he called Mr. Musharraf a "personally scrupulously honest" man who deserved "the benefit of the doubt" on uniting Pakistan.

But Mike Huckabee, the leading Republican in polls of Iowa caucusgoers, found himself on the defensive on Friday, trying to clarify earlier remarks in which he said the chaos in Pakistan underscored the need to build a fence on the American border with Mexico, and that "any unusual activity of Pakistanis coming into the country" should be monitored. A series of misstatements in discussing the issue could buttress criticism that Mr. Huckabee has faced from his opponents that he lacked experience on foreign policy.

The Bhutto assassination is one of those rare things in a presidential race - an unscripted, unexpected moment that lays bare a candidate's leadership qualities and geopolitical smarts. Think of Mr. bin Laden's videotape message late in the 2004 election - giving President Bush a chance to look more commanding than Senator John Kerry - or the twists of the Iranian hostage crisis in 1980, as Ronald Reagan made President Jimmy Carter look feckless. And all of the contenders rushed to weigh in, determined and eager to use the moment to show command of issues both large (Pakistan's relations with India and Afghanistan) and small (the proper pronunciation of Rawalpindi, the garrison city where Ms. Bhutto died).

While there were some stabs at substance - Mrs. Clinton called for an independent investigation into Ms. Bhutto's death, and Mr. Richardson called for cutting off all aid to Pakistan - most of the candidates concentrated on projecting the aura of a steady hand in a crisis.

"Pakistan is a foreign policy problem that requires nuance and finesse, so it's a great test of presidential mettle," said Xenia Dormandy, director of the Belfer Center's Project on India and the Subcontinent at Harvard University. "There are so many priorities: building a democracy, the war on terror, nonproliferation. I do think we're going to see a split between those candidates who have the experience to recognize the complexities, and those who are just determined to play the politics on this one."

Senator Barack Obama of Illinois tried to sound like both a leader and a candidate on Pakistan on Friday. At one point, he said he would suspend some military aid to Pakistan if the government did not hold free elections and clamp down on terrorist groups. At another point, though, he suggested that the war in Iraq - which his rivals Mrs. Clinton, John Edwards and others had voted for - had "resulted in us taking our eye off the ball" in pursuing Al Qaeda and bringing stability to the region.

Some candidates had moments, meanwhile, that sounded a bit out of the presidential loop. Mitt Romney said that, if he had been president, he would have gathered information from "our C.I.A. bureau chief in Islamabad." The Central Intelligence Agency has station chiefs, not bureau chiefs. (That said, Mr. Romney, a former governor of Massachusetts, invoked Mr. Reagan on Friday as a great foreign policy leader, and noted, "he was a governor, not a so-called foreign policy expert.")

Most of the candidates talked Friday about the need for democracy in Pakistan, and no one has stressed that theme more frequently than President Bush himself. But as the complexity of the situation there has set in on the Bush administration in recent years, the talk of democracy has contrasted sharply with the need for stability (something Rudolph W. Giuliani talked about Friday).

The Bush administration's approach so far has been to back Mr. Musharraf at all costs; only Mr. McCain seemed to echo that on Friday.

While the administration has urged the Pakistani government to go through with elections, it has also made clear that it wants Mr. Musharraf to stay in power as long as possible, chiefly because he is the only one Washington trusts to have control over the country's nuclear arsenal.

Pakistan's nuclear weapons are the problem that is the focus of intense attention inside the White House - but an issue that the candidates, aside from Mr. Biden and to a lesser extent Mr. McCain, have talked about rarely. The Bush administration has spent a little less than $100 million in a secret program to help Pakistan protect its arsenal. But outside experts question how effective that effort has been.

Discussing the security of another country's nuclear weapons is something most candidates shy away from. Partly that is because they do not want to strike too much fear into voters. But partly it is because so much of the information is classified, meaning that some of the senators in the race - Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Biden, Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain - may know more than they can say about the American effort. Or, they may have been left in the dark, which, as they seek to project leadership stature, they would not want to admit.

By Patrick Healy, The New York Times, December 29, 2007

STORY CITY, Iowa - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton hurled a dart at President George W. Bush that seemed also aimed at her Democratic rivals, saying the president's mismanagement of Pakistan diplomacy has contributed to instability in that nuclear-tipped nation pocked with Taliban redoubts.

"This is one of the most dangerous and difficult regions in the world, we know that," Clinton told a receptive audience that packed an elementary school gymnasium here Friday. "We have suffered and experienced what that means here at home. I am urging President Bush to adopt a new policy."

In attacking Bush over turmoil in Pakistan one day after the assassination there of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, Clinton suggested that her eight years as the nation's first lady gave her a timely familiarity with world diplomacy that her Democratic rivals lack.

Clinton repeatedly reminded the audience that she had met with leaders from the region as recently as the past year, including Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf and Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai, and said her efforts to get Bush to broker smoother relations between them had proved fruitless.

Clinton accused Bush of failing to hold Musharraf accountable for deteriorating political stability in Pakistan, and urged him to demand an "international, independent investigation" of Bhutto's death.

Clinton devoted about 10 minutes of a 40-minute speech to her views of events in Pakistan, indicating the importance her campaign places on portraying her as being strong on national security, an issue upon which she does well among .potential voters.

She also promised to begin bringing U.S. soldiers home from Iraq within 60 days of becoming president, criticized Bush's "No Child Left Behind" school standards as an unfunded mandate, spoke of a U.S. economy that is losing jobs overseas and offered herself as someone whose presidency could be both tough and compassionate.

"I know how to find common ground and I know how to stand my ground," Clinton said.

Despite holding a sizable lead in national polling, Clinton is in a dead heat in Iowa with Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards. A loss here could shatter her campaign's efforts to offer her as the presumptive favorite for the Democratic Party's nomination.

Despite her criticism of Bush, Clinton accused Obama of politicizing Bhutto's death, following suggestions by Obama's camp that Clinton's early support for the Iraq war had diverted U.S. attention away from instability along Pakistan's border with Afghanistan. The border there has become a hideout for remnants of the Taliban, which U.S. forces drove from power in Afghanistan in 2001.

"I just regret that [Obama and his chief strategist] would be politicizing this tragedy, and especially at a time when we do need to figure out a way forward," Clinton said Friday in an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer.

By Martin C. Evans, Newsday, December 28, 2007

Democrats are locked in a tight struggle in the initial Iowa and New Hampshire presidential contests, as voters weigh Barack Obama's personal qualities against Hillary Clinton's professional qualifications, a Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times survey of the two states shows.

Former North Carolina Senator John Edwards is competitive with the two Democratic front-runners leaders for the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses, though he is behind in New Hampshire, which holds its primary Jan. 8. The party's other candidates barely register in both states.

Clinton, a New York senator, has a small lead among Iowa Democratic voters with 29 percent support, followed closely by Illinois Senator Obama at 26 percent and Edwards with 25 percent. In New Hampshire, Obama has 32 percent, Clinton gets 30 percent and Edwards trails with 18 percent. In both states, the frontrunners' leads are within the poll's margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

"Democratic voters are having a conversation with themselves on what they want more in this election,'' says Susan Pinkus, the Los Angeles Times polling director. "If they choose Obama it's about personal characteristics, whereas for Clinton it's her leadership on issues.''

Strengths, Weaknesses

The poll, conducted Dec. 20-23 and Dec. 26, provides a picture of how Iowa and New Hampshire voters perceive the candidates' strengths and weaknesses. The survey includes 580 Iowa Democratic caucus-goers and 519 New Hampshire Democratic primary voters. Among likely voters in Iowa, Clinton's small lead in Iowa widens a little -- and Obama's support drops somewhat -- though her advantage may not be relevant because caucus turnout is difficult to predict.

Clinton, 60, is viewed as most experienced, best prepared to be president and most qualified to handle a range of important issues, including Iraq, terrorism, the economy and health care.

She also is viewed as the least honest candidate and less likely to produce change in Washington than Obama, 46. By contrast, Obama, is viewed by both Iowa and New Hampshire voters as an agent of change, the more honest candidate and most likely to tell voters what he thinks rather than what they want to hear.

Still, Obama, a one-term senator, gets the lowest grades on experience, with almost half of Iowa Democrats and 41 percent of those in New Hampshire saying he needs a "few more years'' of political seasoning before he is ready to be president.

Candor, Integrity

Voters have more mixed perceptions of Edwards, 54, especially in Iowa. He gets higher marks than Clinton on candor and integrity, and is considered more experienced than Obama. At the same time, he doesn't do as well as Obama on most of the personal traits or as Clinton on most of the policy issues.

If the desire for dramatic change is on voters' minds over the next 11 days in Iowa and New Hampshire, Obama enjoys real advantages.

Democrats in both states say the need for new ideas is more important than experience. In Iowa, the margin is 42 percent to 29 percent; in New Hampshire, it is 48 percent to 27 percent.

"We just need some new ideas,'' says Donald Holbrooke, 65, a poll respondent who lives in Swanzee, New Hampshire, and plans to vote for Obama. "We need new blood in there.''

Clinton's lead on substantive policy issues is sizable: On the economy, she bests Obama by 22 points in Iowa and by 15 points in New Hampshire. In Iowa, she has a 17-point edge over Obama on who would best handle terrorism and national security; in New Hampshire, her advantage is 14 points. The poll was taken before the assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto yesterday, which may spark the type of international crisis that Clinton says she is best qualified to handle.

Experience

Ray Klenske, a retired printer from New Hampton, Iowa who plans to caucus for Clinton says he trusts her to be president because of her eight years of experience as first lady to former President Bill Clinton, her two Senate terms and her travels around the world.

"You can't sit across the table from somebody all those years and not talk business,'' says Klenske, 81. "If you're a farmer's wife you pretty much know as much about operating a farm as your husband does.''

The poll finds a divide in support for Clinton and Obama among age groups, with about two out of five voters age 18 to 44 in both states saying they favor Obama and about the same margin of Democratic voters age 65 and above backing Clinton, though Edwards gets a similar margin of support from that group in Iowa.

Furthermore, Clinton continues to hold onto support from older women. In Iowa, she gets 43 percent of the vote from women age 45 and over, twice as much as Edwards and Obama. The numbers are similar in New Hampshire.

Race, Gender

A plurality of Democrats says the fact that Obama is black and Clinton is a woman won't be factors in the nominating process.

About three-quarters of Iowa and New Hampshire Democrats say a candidate's past use of illegal drugs wouldn't influence their decision.

In his 1995 memoir, "Dreams From My Father,'' Obama wrote that he used drugs as a youth, and he openly discusses that experience on the campaign trail. Earlier this month, Bill Shaheen, a Clinton supporter in New Hampshire, stepped down as a campaign co-chair after saying Republicans would attack Obama for his past drug use if he becomes the Democratic nominee.

Edwards is helped most by the Iowa caucus system, which requires Democrats to switch their support to another candidate if their first choice doesn't get 15 percent of the total vote. Edwards is the top second-choice candidate, with 23 percent.

'Second Choice'

"The feeling right now is that second choice is going to boost Edwards,'' says David Redlawsk, a political scientist at the University of Iowa in Iowa City.

Democrats in both states are in a pessimistic mood, with about nine out of 10 saying the country is going in the wrong direction. A large majority of Democrats in both states also say the economy is doing badly and the war in Iraq wasn't worthwhile.

Along with the Iraq war, one of the top policy issues for Democrats in both states is health care, with a plurality saying their chosen candidate's plans to address the problem is the leading reason for their support.

The pessimism about the state of the country aside, 92 percent of Democrats in Iowa and 88 percent in New Hampshire say they are satisfied with their party's field of candidates.

Scott Romine, a retired teacher from North English, Iowa says he would have "no hesitation'' in supporting any of the Democratic candidates.

"I like my Democratic slate,'' he says.

By Heidi Przybyla and Julianna Goldman, Bloomberg, December 27, 2007

DES MOINES, Iowa (Reuters) - Democrat Hillary Clinton touted her experience and rival Barack Obama made his case for change on Thursday as White House hopefuls scoured Iowa for support one week before the U.S. state's too-close-to-call nominating contest.

Clinton and Obama were among 10 Democratic and Republican candidates who spent the day in Iowa, where next Thursday voters in both parties kick off the state-by-state battle to choose candidates for the November 4, 2008, election to replace Republican President George W. Bush.

Polls show a tight Iowa race on both sides.

Clinton, Obama and John Edwards were in a three-way fight among Democrats and Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee battled for the Republican lead in a state where a win provides vital momentum.

Obama, a first-term U.S. senator from Illinois who has been rapped by Clinton for having too little experience for the job, said he was the candidate who could end the partisan "food fight" and accomplish real change in Washington.

In a speech that took several swipes at Clinton, a New York senator and former first lady, Obama also poked fun at her husband Bill Clinton's statement that electing Obama would be a roll of the dice. "The real gamble in this election is playing the same Washington game with the same Washington players and expecting a different result," he said in Des Moines. "You can't fall in line behind the conventional thinking on issues as profound as war and offer yourself as the leader who is best prepared to chart a new and better course for America." Obama, an early opponent of the Iraq war, has criticized Clinton for voting in the U.S. Senate to authorize it. He and Edwards, a former North Carolina senator, also have attacked her vote to label an Iranian military group a terrorist organization as potentially paving the way to war with Iran.

Clinton stressed her experience as she joined other presidential candidates in decrying the assassination of Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto.

"I have known Benazir Bhutto for a dozen years and I knew her as a leader, I knew her as someone who was willing to take risks to pursue democracy on behalf of the people of Pakistan," she said in Lawton, in northwest Iowa.

'WHO DO WE LEAVE OUT?'

She also took a shot at Obama's health care plan, which critics say would leave up to 15 million Americans uninsured.

"Who do we leave out -- do we leave out this woman who's a nurse but doesn't have health insurance?" Clinton asked, pointing to a woman in the audience.

At a campaign stop in Decorah, Iowa, Edwards also mentioned his past meetings with Bhutto and said he spoke to Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf after the attack and urged him to continue the democratization process in his country.

Several top Republicans were notable exceptions to the focus on Iowa on Thursday.

Huckabee, the Baptist minister and former Arkansas governor who has been surging in polls, was in Florida most of the day.

Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, chatted with diners at coffee shops in New Hampshire, which holds its nominating contest on January 8, five days after Iowa. "I think this will be a challenging race. New Hampshire makes it interesting," he said at Norton's Classic Cafe in Nashua, where he nibbled on a Greek pastry.

Romney, who along with Huckabee has been criticized for a lack of foreign policy credentials, has seen his lead in New Hampshire evaporating under the advance of rival Arizona Sen. John McCain, a former Vietnam prisoner of war.

Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani was in Florida, which holds its contest on January 29. He returned to a familiar theme, his leadership after the September 11 attacks in New York, in unveiling a new television advertisement to run in New Hampshire and Florida, and on national cable television, featuring images of firefighters at the World Trade Center ruins. "When you try and come here and kill our people, we're one and we're going to stand up to you and we're going to prevail," Giuliani says in the ad.

Giuliani, who has seen his lead in national polls shrink and in some cases disappear under the surge from Huckabee, has concentrated on later voting states like Florida and the 22 states holding contests on "Super Tuesday" on February 5.

By John Whitesides, Reuters, December 28, 2007

Less than a week before voting begins, former senator John Edwards and Sen. Barack Obama are engaged in an increasingly pointed duel over which man is the true messenger of "change" in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination -- with both drawing heavily from Bill Clinton's themes during his first campaign for the White House.

STORY CITY, Iowa - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), who has tried to make her experience the central theme of her closing Iowa campaign argument, called Friday for an independent international investigation into the assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto.

In a solemn speech delivered in a packed elementary school gymnasium, Clinton said Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf has lost credibility and criticized the Bush administration's approach to Pakistan as having failed "on two levels," the push for Democracy and the hunt for al Qaeda.

"It is ... clear that the Bush policy giving Musharaff a blank check has failed," Clinton said.

Clinton also called on Pakistan to proceed with "free and fair elections" as soon as a party replacement for Bhutto can be found "on as fast a track as possible."

Clinton, who polls indicate remains in a three-way tie days before the Iowa caucuses, used Thursday's assassination as a transition to discuss her experience and make a final plea for support as she storms the state by bus.

She said Bhutto's assassination is a reminder that the next president will have to be ready to handle both current and future problems.

That is why we need to pick a president who is ready on day one to handle everything that's on that desk [in the Oval Office] and whatever is coming through that door," she said.

The senator also spoke at length about her legislative accomplishments, falling back on what she says are 35 years of experience in fighting for the underdog.

"If you want to know what changes I will make, look at the changes I've already made," Clinton said, asking the crowd to "look at the arc of my life."

On the issue of electability, Clinton promised she would run a tough general election campaign.

"You know, the Republicans have been after me for 16 years, and much to their dismay, I'm still here," she said to applause.

While Clinton, like the media and other candidates Friday, focused on foreign affairs, polls suggest domestic issues have taken priority among voters.

Tim Oelschlager, a union member and plant worker at a John Deere factory in Iowa who attended the Story City speech, said he came to hear Clinton because he wanted to hear her positions on labor organization and job outsourcing.

Oelschlager said he is leaning toward caucusing for former Sen. John Edwards (N.C.), who has made opposition to current administration trade policies a centerpiece of his campaign. But Oelschlager said he wanted to hear more from Clinton on his issues before making up his mind.

Oelschlager said he voted for former President Bill Clinton twice, and he has yet to see Edwards in person, something he hopes to correct soon.

Oelschlager, who said he is retired military, said that while foreign affairs is important, he is more concerned about his children's future and the future of the U.S. economy.

He said his plant alone has lost "thousands of jobs" in recent years, and he is looking for a candidate that can stop that bleeding.

"That's why [the jobs] issue is at the top of my line," Oelschlager said.

Clinton took a couple of questions after she finished her speech. This followed news reports about how she has not taken questions at previous events, even though she traditionally had tried to set aside time at the end of her speeches for audience questions. Earlier Friday, it was reported that she would not take audience questions.

By Sam Youngman, The Hill, December 28, 2007

DES MOINES, Iowa - Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama yesterday traded bitter charges over the assassination of Pakistan's Benazir Bhutto as each sought to capitalize on a development thousands of miles away that threatens to upend the 2008 contest.

Clinton accused Obama's campaign of shamelessly "politicizing" the murder by claiming it was a result of the Democratic front-runner's vote in favor of the Iraq war.

"I just regret that [Obama and his top strategist] would be politicizing this tragedy and especially at a time when we do need to figure out a way forward," Clinton said yesterday on CNN.

Seeking to undermine the notion that Clinton has deeper foreign-policy experience, Obama snidely remarked that she can't count her eight years as first lady and the "ambassadors I visited who I had tea with" among her credentials.

The Clinton-Obama face-off began shortly after news of Bhutto's assassination on Thursday, when Obama's top strategist, David Axelrod, linked the murder to the Iraq war.

"Barack Obama had the judgment to oppose the war in Iraq, and he warned at the time that it would divert us from Afghanistan and al Qaeda, and now we see the effect of that," he said in Iowa. "Sen. Clinton made a different judgment."

Later in the day, he backed off.

"I believe our policies in Iraq have had a direct impact on events in Pakistan and Afghanistan, but I would not suggest there is a straight-line relationship between the events of today in Pakistan and anyone's particular vote," Axelrod said.

Meanwhile, Clinton also called for an independent, international investigation into Bhutto's assassination.

Campaigning in Iowa yesterday, Rudy Giuliani tried capitalizing on his antiterrorism credentials. "We need a president who will keep us on offense on the Islamic terrorist war on us. We realize once again that there is an effort against us by Islamic terrorists," he said.

Iowa front-runner Mike Huckabee said the killing should be a call to arms in this country to keep Pakistanis from overrunning the borders. The federal government should "have an immediate, very clear monitoring of our border and particularly to make sure if there's any unusual activity of Pakistanis coming into the country," he said.

By Charles Hurt, New York Post, December 29, 2007

MASON CITY - Stressing a need for a new beginning for America, Sen. Hillary Clinton told more than 600 North Iowans Friday that the things she has accomplished during her career have her prepared to lead the country.

"We need a president that is ready on day one," the New York senator and Democratic presidential candidate said at the North Iowa Fairground.

Clinton reminded Iowa voters that there are only six days until they caucus.

"Our democracy is the longest running in history," she said. "That is something to be proud of but not to take for granted."

Clinton reviewed her plan for health care for all Americans, establishing new jobs with renewable energy, starting to withdraw troops from Iraq and affordable education.

"We need to stop listening to the two oil men in the White House," she said.





By Bob Link, Globe Gazette, December 28, 2007

Barack Obama, the Democratic presidential contender, pleaded with voters in Iowa yesterday to cast aside doubts about his lack of experience, amid signs that Hillary Clinton had stabilised her troubled campaign and regained the initiative.

Standing before an overflowing crowd in Des Moines, a week before crucial January 3 caucuses in Iowa kick off the presidential nominating process, Mr Obama gave the most powerful speech of his campaign, urging the crowd to reject the Clintons' politics of cynicism and fear in what his campaign calls his "closing argument".

It came as a new poll claimed to show that, after months of deadlock in Iowa, Mrs Clinton had suddenly opened a wide lead. The new American Research Group poll put Mrs Clinton 15 points ahead of Mr Obama, only a week after it had the two in a statistical tie. According to the survey, Mr Obama had suffered a dramatic 11-point drop in support among men.

Iowa polls are notoriously unreliable, and most analysts believe that the race in the Hawkeye State is still a close three-way contest between Mrs Clinton, Mr Obama and John Edwards. But the survey increased anxiety in the Obama camp that Mrs Clinton's relentless message of experience, versus Mr Obama's theme of change, may be having more resonance in the final, frantic stretch of campaigning.

To amplify those concerns, the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, the former Prime Minister of Pakistan, came a day after Mrs Clinton, for the first time, played on voters' fears by declaring the world dangerous and unpredictable, as she crisscrossed Iowa with her husband, Bill, and daughter, Chelsea, on her new "It's Time to Pick a President" tour. Without mentioning Mr Obama by name, Mrs Clinton asked crowds if they were ready to put their faith in an untested leader when "you never know what may happen in some part of the world that will create a real challenge to us here at home".

Late last night the Clinton campaign reacted furiously to a suggestion by Mr Obama's campaign manager that Mrs Bhutto's assassination was linked to Mrs Clinton's vote authorising the Iraq war.

David Axelrod said Ms Bhutto's death will "call into issue who has made the right judgment". He said the resurgence of al-Qaeda in Pakistan was "a consequence of us taking the eye off the ball and making the wrong judgment in going into Iraq".

Phil Singer, a Clinton spokesman, said: "No one should be politicising this situation with baseless allegations."

Mr Obama, who was introduced by General Tony McPeak, a decorated Vietnam fighter pilot and former Air Force chief of staff, responded with the most forceful and aggressive address of his White House attempt. "We can't afford the same politics of fear that invokes 9/11 as a way to scare up votes," he declared before banners proclaiming a new slogan: "Stand for Change." In a clear reference to comments by Mr Clinton last week that an Obama presidency would be a "roll of the dice", Mr Obama said: "The real gamble in this election is playing the same Washington game with the same Washington players and expecting a different result. And that's a risk we can't take. Not this year. Not when the stakes are this high."

Mr Obama did not refer to the Clintons by name, but he did not have to. He spoke of the cynics who had been scornful of his message of hope when he launched his candidacy ten months ago. He talked of the "attack ads and insults, the distractions and dishonesty" aimed against him as his campaign took off in the autumn. "Ten months later, Iowa, you have vindicated that faith.

"If you're ready to stop settling for what the cynics tell you you must accept, and finally reach for what you know is possible, then we will win this caucus, we will win this election, we will change the course of history." The largely partisan crowd gave him a standing ovation.

As Mr Obama and the Clintons campaign relentlessly for the next week, their greatest challenge is not just the bitter Iowa cold, or the prospect of enthusing caucus-goers on New Year's Day. It is Mr Edwards who has a significant chance of winning the state. All the campaigns concede that the Democratic race is still extremely volatile.

Battle for Iowa

34% Democrats in Iowa said that they would vote for Hillary Clinton

19% said that they would back Obama

38% of women said that they supported Clinton, 23% Obama

28% of men would vote for Clinton, 27% John Edwards, 16% Obama

23% of Republicans said that they would support Mike Huckabee

14% would vote for Rudy Guiliani

20% of men would vote for Huckabee and Guiliani

26% of women would vote for Huckabee and Mitt Romney

By Tim Reid, The Times, December 28, 2007

WASHINGTON (AFP) - US Senator Hillary Clinton has narrowly beaten global television celebrity Oprah Winfrey in an annual poll to choose the woman Americans admire most.

Former Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto, who was killed Thursday in Pakistan, made it onto the list for the first time, chosen by two percent of respondents as the woman they admire most. Bhutto had returned to Pakistan in October after several years in exile to contest a parliamentary election scheduled for next month.

Other women in the top 10 were US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (five percent); actress Angelina Jolie and first lady Laura Bush, both with three percent; and former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher, who had the same level of support as Bhutto.

US House of Representatives speaker, Nancy Pelosi, African-American author Maya Angelou and Britain's Queen Elizabeth II rounded off the list, all garnering one percent of Americans' votes.

Clinton, who is the front-runner in the Democratic party's contest to choose a candidate to run for president in next November's election, was chosen by 18 percent of Americans in the survey conducted earlier this month by USA Today newspaper and the Gallup polling agency, as the woman they admired the most.

It was the sixth year in a row that Clinton topped the annually compiled list of most admired women.

Winfrey, who has been actively campaigning for Clinton's rival for the Democratic nomination, Barack Obama, was just two percentage points behind the former first lady, with 16 percent of the vote.

The television presenter is becoming the eternal runner-up in the poll, having finished in second place every year since 1997, with the exception of 2001 when she was in third place -- behind Clinton and Laura Bush.

The poll, conducted on December 14-16, asked 1,011 adults in the United States which man and woman "living today in any part of the world" they admired most.

President George W. Bush was voted the most admired man in this year's poll -- narrowly beating his predecessor in the White House, Bill Clinton.

AFP, December 27, 2007

WASHINGTON -- Barack Obama has wiped out Hillary Rodham Clinton's once-commanding lead in New Hampshire and the two remain virtually tied with John Edwards in Iowa, as more and more voters get off the fence and decide whom to support, a Los Angeles Times/ Bloomberg Poll has found.

Obama drew backing from 32% of New Hampshire Democrats who intend to vote in the primary, compared with Clinton's 30% -- a statistical dead heat. That's a dramatic shift from September, when a similar poll found him trailing 35% to 16% in the state that will hold its presidential primary Jan. 8.

In Iowa, which opens the 2008 presidential voting with its Jan. 3 caucuses, the poll found Sen. Obama of Illinois, Sen. Clinton of New York and former Sen. Edwards of North Carolina in a statistical three-way tie.

But other poll findings suggest Clinton might gain stature in both states if Democrats' concern about world affairs increases after Thursday's assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. The poll shows that Democrats in Iowa and New Hampshire consider Clinton far better equipped than her rivals to safeguard national security -- as do Democrats around the country.

Such a shift in focus away from domestic policy also could affect the Republican presidential contest and benefit Sen. John McCain of Arizona, whose campaign has rebounded in New Hampshire. He's second behind Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts.

The poll found that Republicans in New Hampshire and Iowa consider McCain best qualified to handle foreign affairs, though his campaign has suffered from months of weak fundraising and staff turmoil.

In Iowa, the poll found that the Republican race has been scrambled by the steep rise of former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, the conservative Baptist minister who has opened a lead of 37% to 23% over Romney. For months, Romney had enjoyed a solid lead.

The poll underscores how, in both parties, the two earliest-voting states are ripe for surprises and upsets in the final days of the campaign.

"Things can go a little crazy up here in New Hampshire," said Tom Mathauser, a poll respondent who supports Obama, referring to the state's history of supporting dark-horse candidates like Paul Tsongas in 1992 and McCain in 2000. "This is the kind of thing that can blow up in someone's face."

The poll, under the supervision of Times Poll Director Susan Pinkus, was conducted Dec. 20 through Sunday and on Wednesday in telephone interviews with 2,145 registered voters in Iowa and 1,279 in New Hampshire. The margin of sampling error among Democrats who say they intend to vote in the Iowa caucus or New Hampshire primary was plus or minus 4 percentage points; for Republicans, it was 6 percentage points in Iowa and 5 percentage points in New Hampshire.

N.H. race tightens

The findings illustrate how the competition among Democrats has intensified in crucial early-voting states despite Clinton's big lead in national polls. In the last nationwide poll by the Los Angeles Times this month, Clinton was favored by 45%; Obama, 21%; and Edwards, 11%.

The fresh poll results in New Hampshire are problematic for Clinton because the state has been considered a bastion that could help her recover momentum if she were to have a weak showing in Iowa.

Obama is posing the principal threat there; the poll found Edwards a distant third, with 18%. Other candidates -- Sen. Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut, Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich of Ohio and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson -- drew only single-digit support in both New Hampshire and Iowa.

In New Hampshire, Obama shows strength among independents, who can vote in either primary. And he has made gains even among women and less-educated voters who have generally gravitated to Clinton. Backing for her dropped to 30%, from 35% in September.

But Obama also seemed to gain from the large pool of undecided voters. In September, 17% of New Hampshire Democrats were undecided; now, 11% are.

"He represents an opportunity to make a fresh start," said Jay Fitzpatrick, 53, of East Andover, N.H., who considered supporting Clinton but recently decided to back Obama. "She is too much a part of an establishment down in Washington that has been part of the mess we are in."

In Iowa, Clinton is backed by 29% of Democrats who say they will attend the caucuses, compared with 26% for Obama and 25% for Edwards. That's a virtual tie because the differences are within the poll's margin of error.

But when the survey focused more narrowly on voters who were considered very likely to participate in the caucuses, Clinton's edge became more pronounced: 31% versus 22% for Obama. Edwards' support remained unchanged at 25%.

That points to the importance of the rival campaigns' efforts to get their supporters to the caucuses, where votes are cast in hours-long evening meetings that only a fraction of Iowans traditionally attend.

In both New Hampshire and Iowa, Clinton's claim to governing experience has translated into clear advantages in voters' assessment of her leadership. She is seen -- by wide margins over her rivals -- to be the candidate best equipped for the presidency in general and, in particular, to protect national security and fight terrorism, handle the economy and healthcare, and manage the Iraq war.

Fully 79% of Iowa Democrats say she is prepared to be president; only 43% say Obama is.

But in Obama, voters cite other advantages: In both states, more Democrats see him as the most honest, as well as the best candidate to produce new ideas, bring change to Washington and speak his mind rather than tell voters what they want to hear.

Among Republicans in Iowa, where evangelical conservatives are particularly influential, Huckabee has jumped from the back of the pack despite Romney's heavy spending.

Huckabee, campaigning with an openly religious message, is appealing to conservatives who are not enamored of candidates such as McCain, who has diverged from the GOP party line on tax cuts, campaign finance reform and other issues.

"I am a religious man myself, so that is something that appeals to me," said Chuck Taylor, a retired truck driver in New Sharon, Iowa. "Some of the other candidates don't coincide with my values."

Huckabee gains

Among Iowa Republicans, the poll found that Huckabee dominates Romney and the rest of the field not only among born-again Christians and regular churchgoers but also among women and the disaffected. He was supported by 46% of women surveyed, and 44% of voters who say the country is headed in the wrong direction.

Huckabee argues that the Republican Party needs to acknowledge the pocketbook anxieties of middle-class voters.

The GOP contest in Iowa is essentially a two-man race: Huckabee's 37% and Romney's 23% outdistance McCain and former Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee, both with 11%; and former New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas and Rep. Duncan Hunter of Alpine, Calif., who all register in single digits.

The Republican pecking order is completely different in New Hampshire, where evangelical conservatives hold less sway. There, Huckabee barely registers, backed by only 9%, while Romney leads with 34%.

But McCain has made notable gains in recent months: He has campaigned heavily there and won influential newspaper endorsements in the state, which backed him against George W. Bush in 2000. McCain has jumped into second place with 21%, up from 12% in September.

He edged out Giuliani, whose support in New Hampshire dropped 9 percentage points, to 14%.

Like Clinton, McCain may benefit if voters' concern about international affairs increases with the turmoil in Pakistan. Even in Iowa, far more Republicans say he would be the best candidate to handle foreign affairs. And when Republicans were asked if McCain was well prepared for the presidency, 78% of New Hampshire Republicans said he was.

No other candidate, in either Iowa or New Hampshire, drew such a heavy vote of confidence. But that may not be enough to sway voters who are looking for a fresh face.

"When I hear McCain, I feel comfortable that he may do a better job with the war," said Ray Buffery, a retiree in Concord, N.H., who is nonetheless supporting Romney. McCain, he said, "has been in the Senate quite awhile. [Romney] is a younger person."





By Janet Hook, Los Angeles Times, December 28, 2007

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is the national front-runner for the Democratic nod, while the GOP race is a tossup between Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee, a new poll shows.

The new AP-Yahoo! poll shows Clinton snaring 47 percent of support nationwide, with Sen. Barack Obama a distant second, at 25 percent.

John Edwards takes third place, at 13 percent.

Among Republicans, Huckabee and Giuliani are in a statistical tie, taking 22 percent and 21 percent, respectively.

Sen. John McCain is in third place, at 14 percent, while Mitt Romney gets 13 percent and Fred Thompson takes 11 percent.

Officials in charge of the poll said the numbers on the Democratic side have been static since a similar poll in November. But on the Republican side, Giuliani had been the clear leader, at 27 percent, with Thompson getting 17 percent and McCain taking 15 percent.

The poll of 1,821 people was conducted from Dec. 14 to 20, and has a 2.3-point margin of error.

By Maggie Haberman, New York Post, December 28, 2007

DES MOINES, Iowa - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's stump speech has several applause lines, but only one provokes an emotional and gender-specific response - when she reminds voters her election would make history.

"I'm very excited about the possibility of becoming the first woman president," the New York Democrat says on the campaign trail.

Sometimes she changes it up a bit, saying she is "thrilled at the prospect," but she always adds: "I am not running because I'm a woman. I'm running because I think I'm the most qualified and experienced person to do the job that has to be done."

The audience erupts in applause, and sometimes women turn to their daughters with a smile. At the same events, little girls are seen wearing "I can be president" buttons, and great-grandmothers who were born before women were allowed to vote show their support for Mrs. Clinton.

The former first lady evokes both generations, reminiscing about those "women in their 90s" as well as parents who tell their daughters: "See, honey, you can be anything you want to be."

"I never thought it would happen in my lifetime," Dorothy Weisbord of Wynnewood, Penn., said this fall at a Clinton fundraiser.

Ms. Weisbord remembers New York Democratic Rep. Geraldine Ferraro's bid for the vice presidency with Walter Mondale in 1984. "I didn't think much of her, and Hillary is a very different person. She's tough, and she can win," she said.

Mrs. Ferraro, who failed to win over a majority of female voters two decades ago, is a Clinton supporter.

"Hillary is the candidate I've been waiting 23 years for, and I think we can all agree she was well worth the wait," Mrs. Ferraro said this summer. "When a woman is in a position of power, it makes a difference for all women."

The Clinton campaign is touting a new Gallup poll ranking her the "most admired" woman in the world for the 12th time.

"Her being a woman is very important for me," said Clinton volunteer Oma Iverson, a retired teacher from Sioux City, Iowa. "She's been through the fire, we all know that, in a way none of the other candidates ever have. If not now, when? What does it take in America to get a woman in there?"

But some women worry that Mrs. Clinton - and her husband's impeachment battle after the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal - sets the wrong example for young women.

"I think it's important the president has a stable relationship and stable family, and for that reason I have reservations about Hillary Clinton," said Remy Rochford of Irvine, Calif.

Still, even some Republicans say they would support her, prompting her pollster, Mark Penn, to suggest the "emotional" element of her candidacy could help Mrs. Clinton capture up to 24 percent of female Republican voters in a general election.

Mrs. Clinton's Republican colleague, Sen. Olympia J. Snowe of Maine, noted the historic nature of the Clinton candidacy this summer, calling it "a powerful example that anything is possible" and "a message that reverberates through our society that it is possible."

Former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack, a Clinton campaign co-chairman, recently asked Iowa men to "reflect on a young girl or a young woman who may be important in your life" and "have that young lady in your mind's eye" during Mrs. Clinton's speech.

"Think about being able to go to her on the day after the election and being be able to say to her ... every opportunity is now available to both men and women in this country," he said, adding: "We get a chance to make history."

Sen. Barack Obama, Illinois Democrat and one of Mrs. Clinton's top rivals, also has historic appeal. He would be the nation's first black president if he won the White House.

Democratic activist Joyce Elliott of Little Rock, Ark., summed up her excitement about the 2008 field: "As an African-American woman, either way it finally feels as if I can't lose. It's a feeling like being in the majority. When will this ever happen again?"

By Christina Bellantoni, The Washington Times, December 28, 2007

DES MOINES -- The assassination of Benazir Bhutto came as a brutal reminder of the gravity of the decision Iowa's voters will be rendering in their caucuses next Thursday night. Its impact may be felt most powerfully by Democrats who have been thinking less about issues than about the style of leadership they are seeking from their next president.

All of a sudden, the politicians' endless loop of television advertisements took on a somber significance. During coverage of Bhutto's murder on "Good Morning America," up popped a Hillary Clinton ad where the message over grave music is that the moment "demands a leader with a steady hand who will weather the storms." No kidding.

A short while later, a Joe Biden commercial looks as if it had been produced precisely for this moment. "We don't have to imagine the crises the next president will face," intones a very serious voice. Indeed not.

Clinton, of course, is hoping that the chaos in Pakistan will fortify her relentless arguments about the importance of experience. Biden's refusal to back away from his insistence that this should be a foreign policy election seems shrewder now than it did last week. Biden has been warning not for months but for years that the United States faces its gravest challenge in Pakistan.

The images from Pakistan ratified that Biden was no Chicken Little. He noted yesterday that he had "twice urged President Musharraf to provide better security for Ms. Bhutto and other political leaders." Biden was suddenly relevant -- to television bookers for sure, but also, perhaps, to voters.

David Axelrod, one of Barack Obama's senior advisers, acknowledged that the events in Pakistan could well shake the campaign. But he insisted that they validated Obama's original judgment that the war in Iraq was the wrong battle at the wrong moment. Obama, he said, would be happy to reopen the debate on "judgment" in foreign policy.

Still, Iowa's Democrats work to their own rhythms. Foreign policy differences -- indeed, almost all issue differences -- have had little to do with the battle here.

Instead, said Axelrod, the rhythm of this campaign has been defined by "three different approaches" to the presidency laid out by Clinton, John Edwards and his own candidate.

Clinton's argument, he said, is that "she's been around the block," a not quite charitable way of characterizing Clinton's claims that her experience readies her for the coming battles for change that all Democrats devoutly wish to wage.

"The Edwards campaign is 'Storm the Bastille,' " said Axelrod in a colorful description of the former senator's fierce attacks on drug companies, oil companies and all others who would stand in the way of reform. This is appealing to the many Democrats who are in a fighting mood.

But Obama is running as the candidate who can transcend these fights. In offering his closing argument at a Masonic hall here yesterday, he poked fun at Clinton's recent embrace of change as her own magic word. No, said Obama, change "has been our message when we were down, and our message when we were up. And it must be catching on because . . . everyone is talking about change."

Clearly but obliquely referring to Edwards, Obama preached that anger won't cut it, either. "There's no shortage of anger and bluster and bitter partisanship out there," he said. "We can change the electoral math that's been all about division and make it about addition."

Thus has a wide Democratic consensus defined the choice here as among three different change agents: one tough and experienced, another forceful and angry, the third sunny and inspirational. Biden stands outside their fight, listening to his own drummer.

Reactions Illustrate Their Key Differences

DES MOINES, Dec. 27 -- News of Benazir Bhutto's assassination came just hours before Sen. Barack Obama delivered what his campaign had billed as the "closing argument" in his bid for the Democratic presidential nomination Thursday, forcing his campaign to scramble to incorporate the Pakistani opposition leader into his message of change.

For his chief rival, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), Bhutto's death helped underscore the line she has been driving home for months -- about who is best suited to lead the nation at a time of international peril. In her comments Thursday, Clinton described Bhutto in terms Obama (D-Ill.) could not: as a fellow mother, a pioneering woman following in a man's footsteps, and a longtime peer on the world stage.

The differing reactions of Clinton and Obama to the assassination crystallized the debate between the two just a week before Iowans will decide the first contest in the battle for the Democratic presidential nomination.

While aides said Clinton was anxious not to appear to be politicizing Bhutto's death, they nonetheless saw it as a potential turning point in the race with Obama and former senator John Edwards (D-N.C.).

"I have known Benazir Bhutto for more than 12 years; she's someone whom I was honored to visit as first lady when she was prime minister," Clinton said at a campaign event in a firehouse in western Iowa. "Certainly on a personal level, for those of us who knew her, who were impressed by her commitment, her dedication, her willingness to pick up the mantle of her father, who was also assassinated, it is a terrible, terrible tragedy," she said.

Three hours after news of Bhutto's slaying broke, Obama delivered a withering rebuke of Clinton's experience, depicting her lengthy political resume as a hindrance to solving big problems, including crises abroad. In an especially charged moment, senior Obama adviser David Axelrod would later tie the killing to the Iraq war -- and Clinton's vote to approve it, which he argued diverted U.S resources from fighting terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan, both al-Qaeda hotbeds. "You can't at once argue that you're the master of a broken system in Washington and offer yourself as the person to change it," Obama said. "You can't fall in line behind the conventional thinking on issues as profound as war and offer yourself as the leader who is best prepared to chart a new and better course for America."

His remarks came as part of the unveiling of a new stump speech meant to reinforce his change agenda to Iowa voters before the Jan. 3 caucuses. But at every stop Thursday, he started with a few words about the Bhutto assassination. "She was a respected and resilient advocate for the democratic aspirations of the Pakistani people," Obama said. "We join with them in mourning her loss, and stand with them in their quest for democracy and against the terrorists who threaten the common security of the world."

Aides said the senator from Illinois made several Pakistan-related phone calls between events, including to Anne W. Patterson, U.S. ambassador to Pakistan, and to Donald Kerr, deputy director of national intelligence. Obama also talked to Mahmud Ali Durrani, Pakistan's ambassador to the United States, and urged his country to proceed with democratic elections. But mainly the Bhutto assassination was an undercurrent. No one in Obama's audiences asked him about it, although when a man in Nevada, Iowa, asked about Obama's plan for ending the Iraq war, the senator used it as a segue to lambaste the war for detracting from other regional problems, namely defeating al-Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

"I've been saying for some time that we've got a very big problem" in Pakistan, Obama said. "We were distracted from focusing on them." The phone calls put him behind schedule, and Obama apologized to a Marshalltown audience for showing up half an hour late, explaining that he had to check with U.S. officials involved in the crisis "to make sure that we knew what was going on."

Axelrod, a senior Obama strategist, was more direct, linking the Pakistani crisis to the different positions that Clinton and Obama took on the Iraq war in 2002, when Clinton voted to authorize it in the U.S. Senate, and Obama, then an Illinois state senator, spoke out against it. "Obama opposed the war in Iraq explicitly because he feared it would divert our attention from al-Qaeda, Pakistan, the whole region," Axelrod said. "It underscores the fact that you have to have a president who understands the world, who is going to analyze these events, and who will chart the right course, counter to the conventional thinking."

"There's an issue of judgment," Axelrod said. Obama warned that the war could destabilize the region, "and that's come to pass. Certainly we see evidence of that even today."

Edwards said during an interview on Radio Iowa that he had spoken with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, encouraging him "to continue on the path to democratization, to allow international investigators to come in to determine what happened, what the facts were, so that there would be transparency and credibility about what actually occurred and also about the upcoming schedule of elections and that the important thing for America to do in this unstable environment is first of all focus on the tragedy that's occurred."

Obama has broadly built his foreign policy agenda around his opposition to invading Iraq -- citing that position as evidence of better judgment than his rivals -- and around the tone he promises to bring to international diplomacy.

Clinton has attempted to straddle a difficult foreign policy line throughout the race, voicing sharp opposition to an Iraq war she voted to authorize while taking a hard line toward other countries, including Iran.

Her campaign advisers pounced on Obama's and Axelrod's comments. "This is a time to be focused on the tragedy of the situation, its implications for the U.S. and the world, and to be concerned for the people of Pakistan and the country's stability. No one should be politicizing this situation with baseless allegations," Clinton spokesman Jay Carson said.

At her first event of the day, in Lawton, Clinton delivered straightforward comments on the events in Pakistan. Several hours later, she grew more personal, recalling Bhutto as an acquaintance. Then Clinton tied the political turmoil in Pakistan to the elections in the United States. "When you think about democracy, you're reminded that, in our country, we are the longest-lasting democracy in the world," she said. "One of the great events in our democracy happens a week from tonight, right here in Iowa. And if anything, the terrible events of today are a stark reminder of how important it is for as many Iowans as possible to be part of the journey."

Clinton then added her latest signature theme: "It's time to pick a president."

Obama predicted that the climate will get ugly in the days ahead, starting with a television ad scheduled to begin airing in Iowa on Friday attacking Obama's health-care plan, paid for by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, a Clinton labor ally. "In seven days, what was improbable has the chance to beat what Washington said was inevitable," Obama said. "And that's why in these last weeks, Washington is fighting back with everything it has -- with attack ads and insults; with distractions and dishonesty; with millions of dollars from outside groups and undisclosed donors to try and block our path."

By Anne E. Kornblut and Shailagh Murray, The Washington Post, December 28, 2007

WASHINGTON (AP) - Kitchen table worries pushed ahead of the war in Iraq over the past month, a shift toward pocketbook issues that has gained currency as the election year dawns.

More than half the voters in an ongoing survey for The Associated Press and Yahoo News say the economy and health care are extremely important to them personally. They fear they will face unexpected medical expenses, their homes will lose value or mortgage and credit card payments will overwhelm them.

Events, however, can quickly change public opinion. Thursday's assassination of Pakistan opposition leader Benazir Bhutto could draw more attention to terrorism and national security, an issue that still ranked highly with the public and which 45 percent of those polled considered extremely important.

This latest AP-Yahoo News survey of more than 1,800 people by Knowledge Networks offers a unique opportunity to track changes in public attitudes as the presidential campaign unfolds. The first poll was last month and set a base line to measure national sentiment.

In the new results, men and women approaching retirement were especially attentive to the economy and health care, with six out of 10 ranking both issues extremely important. Politically, the attention to such domestic issues hangs darkly over Republicans. Voters say they are far more likely to trust Democrats to handle the economy and health care.

Consider Linda Zimmerman, a 50-year-old sheep farmer from Thurmont, Md. Her daughter and son-in-law are having trouble keeping up with two mortgages on a town house, she said. One street in her neighborhood has five homes for sale, and one has been on the market for two years.

Registered as a Republican, she's ready to reconsider.

"We're Republicans and I'm very unhappy with them, and I've been watching the Democrats," she said. "We did better when (Bill) Clinton was in than we did with Bush. It's just terrible."

The Democratic edge on such issues illustrates the predicament Republicans face going into a presidential election. Iraq doesn't dominate the news as it used to, replaced by headlines about slumping home sales, high gasoline prices and a credit crunch.

The impact of Bhutto's assassination on public opinion depends on whether Americans perceive her death as an added threat to the United States. Terrorism was the only issue polled that Republicans were more trusted than Democrats to handle well.

Republican Rudy Giuliani had benefited most from people's fears of terrorism. But over the past month his level of support dropped, even among voters who said terrorism was an important issue. Giuliani is now trying to get some of those voters back, releasing an ad Thursday that uses images of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack on New York.

All in all, though, voters appear to be weighing other issues at least as heavily as the country heads into the first voting of the presidential election.

Financial worries have risen in prominence. Forty-eight percent of those polled said Social Security is extremely important to them, up from 42 percent in November. That's virtually the same as the 46 percent who considered Iraq extremely important.

These new public concerns are reflected on the campaign trail, where candidates are hitting domestic topics hard. There too, Democrats have an edge over Republicans when it comes to connecting with their core voters.

Overall, 42 percent of Democrats are very or extremely satisfied with the amount of attention their favored candidates are giving to the issues that matter most to them. Only 32 percent of Republicans feel that way about their candidates. Of all the candidates, Democrat Barack Obama gets the best rating among his supporters.

Bill Hine, a 65-year-old Vietnam veteran from Warrenton, Va., considers himself a "soft Republican" who is partial to John McCain. But the nation's health system needs fixing, he said, and he's not happy with what he's hearing.

"A lot of Republicans are just anti-anything, anti-changing anything, and that's one of the things I'll be looking at," he said.

Six out of 10 people polled said they believe it is at least somewhat likely that the U.S. economy will enter a recession next year. Slightly more - 64 percent - said they worried about a major unexpected medical expense, and 55 percent worried that the value of their stocks and retirement investments would drop.

Forty-four percent said they were concerned that the value of their homes would decrease during the next six months. That sentiment was especially strong in the mountain states.

"Middle-class America is being chipped away at," said Edward Lemieux, a 57-year-old pattern maker from North Smithfield, R.I., who plans to support Obama for president.

His view is influenced by the flight of manufacturing jobs from his state, by the "For Sale" signs that outnumber the "Sold" signs on neighborhood lawns and by his mother's health care needs.

"We're all of a sudden becoming a country of rich and poor," he said. "The middle class is eroding."

Despite those worries, respondents have grown slightly more optimistic about the direction of the nation during the past month. Nearly three out of 10 say the country is on the right path, compared with 24 percent last month. This uptick in the national mood is evident in both parties, though it's much stronger among Republicans. Still, more than seven out of 10 said they believe the U.S. is headed down the wrong track.

Interest in immigration - a major issue in the Republican presidential contest - remained the same as last month, with 37 percent saying it was an extremely important issue. But for all the candidates' efforts to distinguish themselves on that issue, the poll found that none of the leading contenders holds an advantage among Republicans who feel most strongly about immigration.

Sentiments on health care and the economy could make a difference in the Democratic contest.

Hillary Rodham Clinton and John Edwards supporters have much stronger feelings about the economy and Social Security than Obama voters. Edwards has staked his campaign on a message of economic populism, while Clinton draws 40 percent of her support from people with household incomes of less than $25,000, far more than her rivals.

Clinton, Obama and Edwards have been feuding over who would provide the most comprehensive health care plan.

Nearly two-thirds of voters polled said the United States should adopt a universal health insurance program "in which everyone is covered under a program like Medicare that is run by the government and financed by taxpayers." Fewer, but still a majority at 54 percent, said they supported a single-payer system whereby all Americans would get their health insurance through a taxpayer-financed government plan.

Lynn Haynes, 42, of Huntington, W.Va., works in the state government's welfare department where she sees clients who can't afford health care. What's more, she has a 35-year-old sister who is developmentally delayed and "falls into the cracks" of government assistance programs. She's a registered Republican, likes Giuliani but supports universal health care and is giving Democrats a hard look.

"I see too many people at work especially who just don't get any health care," Haynes said. "I look at what they get for retirement and Social Security, and I don't see how they live on that and afford their prescriptions."

The survey of 1,821 adults was conducted from Dec. 14-20, and had an overall margin of sampling error of plus or minus 2.3 percentage points. Included were interviews with 847 Democrats, for whom the margin of sampling error was plus or minus 3.4 points, and 655 Republicans, with a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.8 points.

The poll was conducted over the Internet by Knowledge Networks, which initially contacted people using traditional telephone polling methods and followed with online interviews. People chosen for the study who had no Internet access were given it for free.

By Jim Kuhnhenn and Trevor Tompson, Associated Press, December 28, 2007

Most voters want it. The candidates all promise it. The presidential race hinges on it.

But nobody can quite agree on the meaning of the single most important word of the election: Change.

With the nation at war and facing a raft of domestic problems, voters are demanding a shift from the status quo in Washington. November will be a change election.

But what kind of change? On the Democratic side in particular, that question is at the heart of an unusually competitive race - and it prompted two leading candidates to dig at each other in separate interviews with The Associated Press.

Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois suggested that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton would be no more than a "caretaker" president who represents change only in the sense of replacing a Republican with a Democrat in the White House.

Clinton responded coldly, "I think it matters who is president."

On the campaign trail, Obama is the image of change - young, black and new to Washington. He defines change as the ability to overcome partisan gridlock to solve the nation's problems, uniting Democrats, Republicans and independents "who've lost faith in their Washington leaders but want to believe again (and) who desperately want something new."

Clinton defines change as something important that comes only with experience, a twist of logic that her own advisers concede is a tough sell. It's hard to be for change as a veteran of the status quo.

She's trying to finesse the argument by closing the Iowa campaign with a focus on her experience - 35 years in public life, mostly as the first lady of Arkansas and the nation.

"I think certainly the question is who is prepared from Day One to step in and address all of the challenges we face plus all the unpredictable issues that cross the president's desk," Clinton said in an interview with the AP between campaign stops.

Her latest television ad casts Clinton an agent of change ("a new beginning") who can cope with war abroad and anxiety at home ("a steady hand"). She would be the nation's first female president, which is in itself a major change.

Though it's fair to wonder how much more prepared she is for the presidency than her chief rivals - having never run a major organization or been considered a major player in foreign policy - Clinton gets the benefit of the doubt from voters. A recent ABC News-Washington Post poll in Iowa found that she wallops Obama on the question of who has the most experience - 49 percent to 8 percent.

She and her husband, former president Bill Clinton, cast Obama as too raw for the presidency. Their argument carries weight with voters, including some Obama admirers, who wonder whether he's trying to move too fast from the Illinois legislature to the U.S. Senate to the White House.

Obama can point to modest record of achievement in Illinois and Washington, but nothing on his resume sets him apart from the field. Still, he says he's not the risk. "The real gamble in this election," Obama said in his speech, "is playing the same Washington game with the same Washington players and expecting a different result."

A third leading Democrat, former vice presidential candidate John Edwards, is the white-hot advocate for change. He argues that Clinton is too close to special interests and Obama is too accommodating to them. "Compromise and conciliation is the academic theory of change. It just doesn't work in the real world," Edwards said in the text of an address prepared for delivery Friday. "Fighting for conviction is the historic reality of change."

In the AP interview, Clinton was asked how her definition of change differed from her rivals.

"I believe everyone talks about wanting change but the real challenge is who can deliver change and positive results," she said. "Some people think you can bring about change by demanding it and some people think you can bring about change by hoping for it. I think you bring about change by working hard for it."

In her view, Edwards only talks about change, Obama only dreams of it and she's the only one who would produce it.

Not so, said Obama. How does his definition of change differ from Clinton's? "I think Senator Clinton's argument is that what ails us today is the Republicans are in charge and once George Bush is out of office there will be sort of a return to the policies of the Clinton era and that will solve our problems," he told the AP. "My argument is that we need more fundamental change than just a change of political parties in the White House."

"This election is about whether or not we simply settle because we don't really think things can change that much, so we want a caretaker who can do things a little better than Bush," Obama said. "Or are we really shaking things up and making them better?"

Polls suggest the race is a dead heat - that Democratic voters in Iowa are evenly divided between Clinton, Edwards and Obama and their competing views on how to reform Washington.

That will change.

Associated Press, December 27, 2007

Until the past week or so, the press had pretty much written off John McCain's chances of gaining the GOP nomination. But if he can gain his party's nod, he remains the candidate, from either party, most likely to prevail in a general election - and thus win the presidency.

That could make a difference in the homestretch of the Iowa and New Hampshire campaigns, since surveys have shown time and again that voters on both sides of the aisle care about electability. But the polls everyone's studying at the moment don't accurately address this issue. How voters view the candidates today is not how they're going to view them in November - once a candidate gains the nomination, he or she is transformed into an altogether different character.
By looking at historical trends and the appeal of each of the current candidates, one can come up with fair indications of who is likely to rise or fall in a general-election campaign. Assuming each of these candidates were to win his or her party's nomination, here, in order, is an assessment of their chances of winning a general election.

1) JOHN MCCAIN McCain would bring a number of advantages to a general-election campaign. He's been in the national-election eye the longest, so he's well known and trusted - passing the presidential-threshold test by a mile. He's a national hero of sorts. And, he's perceived as enough of a maverick that he would appeal to some Democrats and independents. His weaknesses would be his age (he'd be the oldest person ever initially elected to the presidency), and the fact that his soft immigration stand might attract a third-party anti-immigration candidate. Still, despite his lukewarm showing in current GOP polls, he began this whole cycle as the strongest potential candidate in a general election, and he remains so - as long as it continues to appear that the war effort has turned a corner.

2) JOHN EDWARDS The only Democrats to win the popular vote after 1960 have been Southerners. Why should it be any different now? Yes, Edwards is liberal, but his candidacy would put a number of usually safe GOP states, such as Virginia, into play. Edwards expands the playing field, which is what you want to do to be a strong general-election candidate.

3) RUDY GIULIANI Giuliani does for the GOP what Edwards does for Democrats - he puts states normally carried by the other party into play (in his case, New Jersey or Pennsylvania). His weakness is that his candidacy would likely trigger a third-party social-issues candidate from the right, who would need to get only one to two percent of the votes in key states to throw the election to the Democrats. A Bloomberg independent candidacy wouldn't do him any favors, either.

4) (tie) HILLARY CLINTON Clinton and Obama have the same initial problem. Each has a scenario to get to about 310 electoral votes - more than enough to win (270 is required), but one that doesn't give either a large margin of error. Of the two, Clinton has less upside potential than Obama because she's divisive. But she has far less downside potential, too, because she's a known commodity. If there's a serious independent candidacy, her chances improve markedly. After all, getting to 46 percent (which is probably all it would take to win a three-person race) isn't Clinton's problem - it's getting to 50 percent plus one.

4) (tie) MIKE HUCKABEE Huckabee has the potential to rank higher: his strength is that, coming from nowhere, he would become the "change" candidate in the race, likely heading off any GOP social-issues or immigration splinter candidacies. But as such a new figure, he could be subject to wild fluctuations in public opinion - much like Jimmy Carter was in 1976 - and could even flame out entirely. Still, if Huckabee could hold Ohio and Florida for the Republicans - not a terrible bet if he could convince the nation he wasn't a weirdo - he'd win the general.

6) BARACK OBAMA On paper, Obama has more potential than Clinton because he appeals to independents. But he's far more of a risk, too: like all newcomers, he could fall apart under scrutiny. When your margin of error to win 270 electoral votes is as low as his is (at best he could get to around 310), that's a danger. Yes, he could be another Kennedy (who won the popular vote by all of 0.1 percent, by the way). Or he could be another, gulp, McGovern.

7) MITT ROMNEY If Romney had run as a Northeast new-face businessman, he'd have had the persona to wage a formidable general-election campaign, putting the Democratic base at risk with the same strengths as Giuliani. Alas, he chose to run as the man of a thousand faces. Even as the nominee, it would be hard to see how he could reinvent himself once again as a centrist. And the religious issue would still be lurking.

8) FRED THOMPSON Even as the nominee, Thompson would be the second coming of Bob Dole - a man who likely held the base and nothing more. He would offer little risk, but little reward, either.

By Steven Stark, Real Clear Politics, December 27, 2007

LAWTON, Iowa (AP) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign took on the appearance of a family business as she headed into the final week of the race for Iowa's leadoff precinct caucuses, driving home to activists the stakes in those caucuses and her view that she's ready for the job.

"Next week the eyes of the country and the world will be on Iowa, the world will be holding its breath," said Clinton. "We know that this decision you face is so important, you are picking a president and there isn't any more significant decision for you to make as a citizen."

Clinton opened her campaign day with a rally before about 300 people jammed into a high school in western Iowa.

She joked about a landing at a foggy airport that delayed her arrival by half and hour.

"We weren't sure we were going to be able to land," said Clinton. "Right after we landed they closed the airport again. I think that's a good omen."

Most polls have shown Clinton in a very tight and fluid race with rivals John Edwards and Barack Obama, with the stakes very high in next week's caucuses. Clinton has led in national polls but many strategists argue that a win in Iowa could give her the momentum to seal to the nomination.

She was working to close the sale in the final week, and leaving nothing to chance. Daughter Chelsea Clinton was at her side as she stumped through a series of stops in western Iowa, and her husband, former President Clinton,l was keeping his own campaign schedule in the state.

Clinton also brought along Mark Nicholson, an apple farmer from upstate New York to cement her ties to rural Iowa.

"We weren't used to getting a lot of attention from politicians in New York," Nicholson said. "Seven years later, it's amazing how far we've come."

Clinton hammered home her electability, and described for activists the type of general election campaign she'd run.

"I will wage a campaign that stands for our values and our country's future," she argued, warning that she's capable of standing up to what will certainly be withering assault from Republicans.

"The Republicans have been after me for 16 years and I'm still here," said Clinton.

With the assassination of a world leader as a backdrop, Clinton was reminding activists of her experience and familiarity with the White House and the challenges facing the next president.

"We know how important it is, the decision that will start here in Iowa in one week, picking a president that is ready on day one to deal with the myriad of problems" facing that next president, said Clinton. "Our next president will be sworn in on Jan. 20, 2009. Waiting on that president's desk in the oval office will be problems that are incredibly difficult, that present challenges to our leadership in the world, to our moral authority, to our economy, to the kind of society we are and want to be. These are some of the problems we know about."

She said it is inevitable that unexpected problems will confront the country and argued that on the ground experience in the White House is the only way to be prepared for that.

"That's the nature of the job and the world in which we live," she said. "It certainly raises the stakes high for what we expect from our next president. I know from a lifetime of working to make change."

All of her surrogates sounded the same theme.

"We were all incredibly impressed by her leadership," said Nicholson. "We need someone who is tested and proven.

By Mike Glover, Associated Press, December 27, 2007

US presidential hopefuls returned to the campaign trail on Wednesday after a pause for Christmas with the latest opinion poll showing Hillary Clinton regaining the lead among Democrats in Iowa a week before the state's first-in-the-nation caucuses.

Earlier polls had the New York senator locked in a dead heat with Barack Obama in Iowa, with John Edwards close behind.

But an American Research Group survey released on Christmas eve showed the former first lady leading Mr Obama, the senator for ­Illinois, by 15 percentage points, up from four points in the same poll a week earlier.

The survey offered reassurance to Mrs Clinton after a tough few weeks during which her campaign appeared to lose momentum while Mr Obama surged back into contention.

After months spent trumpeting her strength and experience, Mrs Clinton has spent recent days campaigning alongside her mother and daughter across Iowa in a belated attempt to soften her harsh public image.

But the main narrative to the Democratic race remains the perceived choice between Mrs Clinton's greater experience and Mr Obama's promise of change.

While the ARG poll showed Mrs Clinton back in command, the survey found the Republican contest tightening into a dead heat between Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts, and Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas.

Mr Huckabee had opened a double-digit lead in Iowa over recent weeks, bolstered by support from Christian conservatives. But Mr Romney, who had led in the state for most of this year, appears to be clawing back lost ground.

Iowa's caucuses on January 3 mark the first of the state-by-state contests that will determine each party's nominee in next November's presidential election.

Candidates hope a strong performance in Iowa and New Hampshire, which holds its primary election on January 8, will propel them towards their party's nomination.

In New Hampshire, polls show Mrs Clinton with a narrow poll lead over Mr Obama in the Democratic race, while Mr Romney heads the Republican field with John McCain, senator for Arizona, gaining ground in second place.

Rudy Giuliani, the former mayor of New York, is trailing in fifth place in Iowa and third in New Hampshire but hopes victories in several states that vote later in January and early February will catapult him back into contention for the Republican nomination.

By Andrew Ward, Financial Times, December 27, 2007

Watching What Richardson, Biden and Dodd Tell Their Supporters

In the next few days, one story we'll all be watching for in the Democratic presidential campaign is what Bill Richardson, Joe Biden and Chris Dodd tell their people do to if they aren't viable on caucus night.

Viability

That's the party rule that says for a candidate to qualify for any delegates in a precinct, he or she must get support from 15 percent of the total number of people at the caucus.

Supporters of those candidates who don't have 15 percent are required to realign with a candidate who does - or form a new group that meets the threshold - in a second round of voting.

It's not a small matter. Since the Iowa Democratic Party reports only an estimate of state convention delegates won as a result of that second round vote, the official result becomes a count of those delegates, not the initial preferences of people as they go into the caucus site.

At most caucuses, frontrunners Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and John Edwards will have 15 percent. The others may not. The question then is, what do the Richardson, Biden and Dodd people do? Most will make up their own mind. It's why the second choice preferences of their supporters are so important.

But some of these folks might like a little guidance from their standard bearer. It's why the actions of the single digit candidates are still important in the closing days of the campaign.

Four years ago, on caucus day the Dennis Kucinich and John Edwards people cut a deal: In those precincts where one of them wasn't viable, his people were encouraged to go with the one that was.

In those precincts where neither were viable, people were encouraged to form a viable group around the one with the most votes. It proved an important factor in Edwards good showing.

While Kucinich didn't have much support, his people did give Edwards a few extra percentage points that helped push him into second place.

So, this year, we'll all be watching to see if someone tries a similar move Jan.3. It's why candidates who often don't get a lot of respect in the final days should still be respected and could prove pivotal.

It's why Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama - or their Senate friends - should be getting on the phone to Chris Dodd and promise to vote for him for Senate majority leader if he tilts toward Clinton or Obama. He doesn't have to quit the race or endorse someone else, just signal what his people should do if he isn't viable in a precinct.

Or maybe Biden and Dodd - old pals from the Senate - should agree to rally around the one with the most support in a precinct, something that is likely to help Biden since he's showing more support in the polls than is Dodd. Or maybe form a Biden Dodd group, since the two are already often lumped together.

Republicans are much easier to understand. They just drop a name in a hat and announce the totals. Still, a version of this "Who will the single digit candidates support?" game got played recently when Tom Tancredo quit and urged his people to support Mitt Romney.

Tancredo had only 2 percent support but he understood that in Romney's close race with Mike Huckabee, those two percentage points might be important. It was better for Tancredo's cause to help a candidate who believes has he does on most immigration questions than be an afterthought on caucus night.

By David Yepsen, Des Moines Register, December 26, 2007

One week. That's all the time left in the 2008 Iowa caucus campaign.

While many are ready for it to be over - caucus-goers are tired of the robot calls, and political and media types are tired of the same old restaurants - the race remains delightfully undecided.

That means one week from today, some real news is going to be committed in Iowa.

The big question is: "Who is going to win?" (Since I stupidly answered that question in a pre-caucus column four years ago - Howard Dean - I now quote Mark Shields, one of the most respected political columnists in our business, who told Jim Lehrer something to this effect: That is a very good question, Jim. And I would be a fool to answer it.)

However, like Shields, that doesn't mean I don't have observations to share. How about the question: "Who is going to lose?"

So let's look at third place.

Third-place showings are likely to hold exactly opposite meanings in the two parties this cycle.

On the Democratic side, a third-place finish will severely wound a leading candidate, perhaps mortally. On the Republican side, it just might provide a shot of political steroid for a lagging candidate as the race heads to New Hampshire.

Some background: Throughout the history of the modern early caucuses, no candidate who has ever finished worse than third in a competitive race has ever gone on to win a nomination. As has been noted here before, there are three tickets out of Iowa to New Hampshire on the morning after: first class, coach and standby.

Among the Democrats, polls show that Barack Obama, John Edwards and Hillary Clinton are in a close race for first place. All need to win. Clinton's been the national front-runner and needs an Iowa victory to certify that standing. Obama has come on strong at the end, and if he defeats Clinton for first place here, he stands a chance of pulling a John Kerry: Use an Iowa victory to run the table of subsequent contests and capture the nomination.

For Clinton to finish second behind Obama would be a defeat, though she will spin it that she had a successful effort in the state because she started so far behind here.

John Edwards finished second last time and must do better than that now to survive. He's already seen as a bit of a one-trick pony who has a great campaign in Iowa and little elsewhere. It's an observation he disputes.

The only common thread to this is that third place to any of them would be a dead zone. On a plane as full as the Democratic one, there is no standby ticket out of Des Moines on Jan. 4.

Polls also show there is so much distance between the top three and the bottom tier of Bill Richardson, Joe Biden and Chris Dodd that their hopes for a third-place showing would seem to be dimming.

While a third-place finish will hurt the Democratic front-runner who winds up there, it will still provide a small springboard on the Republican side.

In Iowa, Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney are battling for first. Romney led early, but polls show Huckabee in the lead now. Neither seems likely to finish third.

That slot is vacant, which is why Fred Thompson, Rudy Guiliani, John McCain and Ron Paul are all rediscovering the joys of Iowa here in the last few days of the caucus campaign.

(Had any one of them paid closer attention to the state earlier, he would be in a better position to take third. But don't ask me to explain the strategic decisions of any of these candidates. They seem to be making them up as they go along.)

Here in the final days, they've each realized that a third-place finish would give them a little boost into New Hampshire and the subsequent contests - and winnow out the fourth-, fifth- and sixth-place winners.

In other words, there is a standby seat on the Republican plane. Welcome back, boys. We know you have many choices for your air travel. Thank you for flying Iowa.

By David Yepsen, Des Moines Register, December 27, 2007

MOUNT PLEASANT, Iowa - Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton unveiled a new political message Wednesday afternoon upon her return to campaigning in Iowa, urging voters in the Jan. 3 caucuses to "pick a president" rather than simply supporting a candidate who appeals to them personally.

And she also struck a markedly new tone, punching her words with new verve, speaking far more rapidly, and tearing into President Bush repeatedly. The performance conveyed much more of a fighting, populist spirit than Mrs. Clinton has demonstrated in recent weeks - call it give-em-hell-Hill - and reminiscent of the style of one of her most popular challengers in Iowa, former Senator John Edwards.

"We need a balance of power back, because all the power has shifted over to one side, George Bush's government, of the few by the few and for the few, the well-connected and the wealthy," Mrs. Clinton said, drawing her first standing ovation from a few dozen audience members in a crowd of over 1,000 in Mount Pleasant, Iowa. It was the first standing ovation that Mrs. Clinton has received mid-speech in recent weeks.

As president, she said, the United States would "quit being in debt to foreign countries from China to Mexico," and she would stop "borrowing money from the Chinese to buy oil from the Saudis." She also used a new, emotionally charged phrase - "sick to death" - to express her anger at the Bush administration, a line that was rewarded by heart applause from the audience.

"I am sick to death of no-bid contracts and cronyism and incompetence and indifference and corru