=========================================
Today's Top Political Stories | All bridge size playing cards -------------------------------------
* Clinton's Rivals Adopt More Partisan Approach
* The Silver State's Golden Opportunity
* Icebergs Ahead For the Democrats
Recent Posts
------------
Iowa Union Endorsement For Obama
While Sen. Barack Obama prepared for the Las Vegas debate, his
campaign announced a key endorsement from an Iowa union.--Shailagh
Murray ( 5:44 PM ET) | More »
Rising in Iowa Polls, Huckabee Now In Crosshairs
Mike Huckabee is discovering the flip side of a surge. ( 5:30 PM ET) |
More »
Reid's Tips On A Night in Vegas
It's debate day in the Silver State, and Senate Majority Leader Harry
Reid has a few tips for the seven Democratic presidential candidates
who square off tonight in Las Vegas. ( 3:45 PM ET) | More »
Spoiling for a Fight
As Democrats prepare for Thursday night's debate in Las Vegas, the
focus is still on Clinton. Can she recover and prove what happened in
Philadelphia was an aberration -- or might there truly be a contest
for the Democratic nomination once the curtain falls in Nevada? ( 2:20
PM ET) | More »
Blumenthal Back to Working For a Clinton
Sid Blumenthal, at one time an assistant to Bill Clinton, has joined
Hillary Clinton's campaign.--Howard Kurtz ( 2:20 PM ET) | More »
More from The Trail »
RSS Feed
Previous Posts
--------------
By Date
* Full Story Archive »
Top Categories
* All Categories »
At the Diners
-------------
Watch the video
Giuliani's playing cards mandarin tutor chicago Diner Tour
The Giulianis spend a busy day diner-hopping in New Hampshire,
including a stop at the Red Arrow. And in Iowa, at the Waveland Cafe,
voters are looking for a "real" Republican.
More from the diners series »
More Campaign '08
-----------------
The Presidential Field
* Candidate Profiles
* Campaign Finance
* The Gurus
Analysis
* The Fix
* Behind The Numbers
Calendar / Events
* Campaign Tracker
* The Primaries
Multimedia
* Channel '08: The 2008 Election on Video
Interaction
* Live Q&A: Post Politics Hour (M-F, Noon)
* Voting Blocs Discussion Group
Dan Balz's Take
Spoiling for a Fight
--------------------
Will Clinton turn up the heat--as her new campaign signs promise--at
tonight's debate? (AP).
Barack Obama was the story heading into the Democratic debate in
Philadelphia two weeks ago. Would he take on Hillary Clinton or not?
Coming out of the debate, the spotlight was on Hillary Clinton and her
poor performance.
As Democrats prepare for Thursday night's debate in Las Vegas, the
focus is still on Clinton. Can she recover and prove what happened in
Philadelphia was an aberration -- or might there truly be a contest
for the Democratic nomination once the curtain falls in Nevada?
Clinton's rough ride continued Wednesday when the campaigns of Obama,
Chris Dodd and John Edwards attacked her for her latest statement on
drivers licenses for illegal immigrants.
When New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer abandoned his plan to allow
undocumented immigrants to obtain licenses, Clinton -- who had earlier
said she supported Spitzer's efforts to deal with the problem -- said
as president that she would not supporting giving licenses to
illegals.
Obama spokesman Bill Burton took a double shot at the Democratic
frontrunner over that statement. "When it takes two weeks and six
different positions to answer one question on immigration, it's easier
to understand why the Clinton campaign would rather plant their
questions than answer them," he said, rolling the immigrant
controversy into an ongoing flap in Iowa.
Dodd spokeswoman Colleen Flanagan called the latest statement
"flip-flopping cubed," while the Edwards campaign said simply, "We're
dizzy."
Even Clinton has conceded that her Philadelphia debate performance was
sub par, but rival strategists argue that it continued on a pattern of
less-than-impressive debates over the past few months -- after
delivering a succession of strong performances in early debates that
helped establish her as a dominant front-runner for the nomination.
Joe Trippi, senior term life insurance in the Edwards campaign, said Wednesday
that Clinton began to stumble at the YearlyKos debate last August in
Chicago, when she refused Edwards's challenge to pledge not to take
money from registered Washington lobbyists and even defended lobbyists
in her answer.
At the Dartmouth debate in September, Clinton came under attack from
Edwards for supporting a resolution on Iran that most of her rivals
opposed. She also ran into turbulence over her position on Social
Security, and some of the post-debate commentary challenged her for
being evasive.
The result, in Trippi's estimation, is a different campaign than it
was a month ago. "The landscape has totally changed since the last
time," he said. "She entered the last one [debate] sort of the
invincible, insurmountable, inevitable nominee and in the course of
two or three weeks, she's a mere mortal. So in that point of view the
terrain has changed."
Edwards believes he has set the pace in challenging Clinton and Trippi
said that will continue in Las Vegas and beyond. "We're going to keep
doing what we've been doing. We're going to make clear the clearest
differences in the race is between Hillary Clinton and John Edwards --
her status quo and our populist campaign for change."
But Edwards has competition on that front from Obama, who arrives at
the debate after an impressive speech at the Iowa Democratic Party's
Jefferson-Jackson dinner last Saturday and several good days of
campaigning there, in which he appeared to gained confidence as a
candidate. His campaign is trying to capitalize on this financially
and politically.
Obama and Edwards offer contrasting styles but they are allies in
attempting to force Clinton into a real debate and thereby overtake
her in Iowa and nationally. All the campaigns believe there is a tight
race in Iowa and some polls elsewhere have shown Clinton's
once-overwhelming lead shrinking a bit in the past couple of weeks.
Clinton's campaign appears ready for a rough night in Las Vegas. Asked
what she expected, a senior campaign official said early Thursday,
"Heavy attacks. I think both Obama and Edwards are coming loaded for
bear." Asked whether she is ready to fire back, the cards playing custom emailed
not-so-cryptically, "Stay tuned."
The Clinton campaign has never shrunk from confrontation with independent clothes rivals and there's every reason to expect that she will approach this
debate differently than she did the forum in Philadelphia. Preparation
is her hallmark as a public official, and hardball politics the M.O.
of her operation.
Clinton doubtless have plenty of material to undercut anyone who
challengers her. But Clinton's double challenge is to counter attacks
without appearing angry or defensive.
At this stage of the campaign, every debate becomes a potentially
significant imprinted playing cards in the campaign. Until now, Clinton has attempted
to stay above the fray, focusing her attacks on President Bush and the
Republicans rather than her Democratic rivals. She may not have that
luxury in Las Vegas.
On Saturday in Des Moines, the front-runner unveiled a new slogan --
"turn up the heat" -- and customized playing cards it to exhort the Democratic audience to
challenge Bush and the Republicans. But it may have been a warning to
her Democratic rivals. Will tonight provide the occasion for her to
turn up the heat on Obama and Edwards? And if she does, will the
Democratic race look different on chinese lessons chicago than it insurance quote today?
--Dan Balz
Posted at 2:20 PM ET on Nov 15, 2007 | streetwear style Dan Balz's Take
Share This: Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Tag in Del.icio.us |
Digg This
Comments
Please email us to report offensive comments.
I'd like to see someone ask the Senator to compare her campaign
rhetoric to 'turn up the heat' - whether on Repubs or her Dem
opponents - with her husband's advice to build coalitions rather than
demonizing the opposition. I'm not trying to be snarky when I suggest
that perhaps Bill should support Obama rather than his wife.
Posted by: bsimon | November 15, 2007 03:00 PM
Bill and Hill have their stance on the Driver's License Thingy well in
hand! There was no Flip or even a Flop.
Lawyers know full well how to manipulate those little thingys.
Legalize 20,000,000 invading Criminals(Next time it will only be
400,000,000), and SHAZAM! Instantly Fixed!
Meanwhile, as Mitt Romney's Bus is rolling on to the Presidency of
this country(As opposed to Mexico), there is a strange noise-
Whump!
WHUMP!
Big one must have been Slick!
Posted by: rat-the | November 15, 2007 03:16 PM
Hillary is sniffing her nose in trouble and her support is going to
weaken as Obama makes a car insurance in the polls.
Hillary has such a reputation that is longer than any children's
Christmas list or Pinocchio's nose. Obama is clear and actually has
ground, while Hillary's only direction is sailing in the wind back and
forth any direction and she is not likable to say the least.
Barack has the likeability and the personality while Hillary has her
rod and whip (just ask Bill). Barack has determination, skill, and the
momentum that the Democratic Party needs. If he loses the primaries,
you can say, bye, bye.
Just ask the nation, a recent poll said that 50% of American's would
not vote for Mrs. Clinton. So why even rewind to the most polarizing
candidate and choose a very, very, oblate person? Barack has the
personality, and at least he is not like a washer that goes both ways
on issues. As for the republican's any of the leading candidates would
beat Hillary. She is not destined for the White House she already had
her eight years as president.
Posted by: JoshuaUdell | November 15, 2007 03:22 PM
Agreeing with what you are saying, but you know, whether Hillary
triangulates, postulates or pontificates, there were 50% of the
country that wasn't going to indie style for her, regardless of whether or
not she captured the pulse of the country on every issue - period!
(see above, rat, the) It just wouldn't matter. Hillary entered our
public life during the hey-day of "gotcha" media, and was pilloried as
a "femi-nazi" by Rush and the ditto heads, and those folks are never,
never, never, never, never going to vote for Ms. Clinton, even if she
promised to round up all illegals, put a BMW SUV in every garage, and
completely repeal the capital gains tax...it just wouldn't matter to cheap auto insurance certain segment of our society.
That's why she's the wrong candidate for the Dems, regardless of her
positions.
Posted by: johndinhouston | November 15, 2007 03:31 PM
Hillary has clearly shown that she is not a friend of the middle class
or the poor which make up the base of her own Party.
Hillary has strongly indicated that, as president, she would continue
the policies of her husband.
But Bill was a clear enemy of the above Base. As President, he allied
himself surfboard shape playing cards the GOP to help, big time, to advance their agenda of
advancing the interests of the wealthy elite at the expense of the
poor & Middle Class. He stood with the GOP to pass so-called "Welfare
Reform," & to tighten eligibility requirements for social programs
like Food Stamps & Medicaid, (actions house insurance have proven to be very
harmful toward the well-being of the poor.) He stood with them to pass
international trade policies like NAFTA & GATT, (which have proven to
very harmful to the streetwear fashion Middle Class & have added to the influx
of illegal immigrants into the country.) And he stood with the GOP to
increase the Social Security Tax on the Middle Class & the poor while
continuing to raid full color playing cards Social Security Trust Fund (as other presidents
have done streetwear clothing Reagan,) for general revenue purposes. All this while
holding the line on taxes on the wealthy.
As was the case with her husband, by way of her Senate record & her
campaign rhetoric, Hillary has shown that she will continue her
husband's policies of allying herself with the GOP & will, at best,
ignore the needs of the Democratic Base, & at worse, will, like Bill,
work against their welfare.
While Hillary is a slight asset to Democrats while serving in the
Senate, Democrats can do much better than Hillary as their nominee for
President.
Posted by: book134 | November 15, 2007 03:31 PM
I used to really like Edwards, but over the past few months he has
become such a shrill b-i-tch I just can't stand listening to him
anymore -- it shows the kind of man he becomes when engaging with
others he disagrees with and wants to persuade others to agree with
him. How can someone with these behavioral tendencies be successful
negotiating on domestic issues or cultivating important diplomatic
relationships?
Posted by: markwdc | November 15, 2007 03:33 PM
Dan Balz, the independent fashion of this biased article, is just another of the
many men that are attacking our beloved Hilary just because she is a
woman - God's preferred sex.
Stop it you meanies.
So what if she is double-talking and two-faced and has a platform that
consists of: Show-Me-The-Money, Say-Whatever-They-Want-To-Hear,
Continue-The-Neocon-Wars, Sell-The-Lincoln-Bedroom, and
I-Want-A-New-Pair-Of-Hsu's. So what if there are no depths of
depravity to which this moneywhor'e won't go, including staging
questions at public events. So what if she is Bush-Lite on the neocon
wars and many other critical issues. So what is she is an advocate for
the most un-American piece of legislation ever enacted, the so-called
"Patriot" Act, which shows clearly that she will be as lawless,
secretive and anti Bill of Rights as DickNBush.
She is woman - let her roar!
HILLARY IS INEVITABLE - DON'T FIGHT IT -HILLARY IS INEVITABLE - DON'T
FIGHT IT - HILLARY IS INEVITABLE - DON'T FIGHT IT -HILLARY IS
INEVITABLE - DON'T FIGHT IT -HILLARY IS INEVITABLE - DON'T FIGHT IT
-HILLARY IS INEVITABLE - DON'T FIGHT IT -HILLARY IS INEVITABLE - DON'T
FIGHT IT -HILLARY IS INEVITABLE - DON'T FIGHT IT -HILLARY IS
INEVITABLE - DON'T FIGHT IT -HILLARY IS INEVITABLE - DON'T FIGHT IT
-HILLARY IS INEVITABLE - DON'T FIGHT IT -HILLARY IS INEVITABLE - DON'T
FIGHT IT -HILLARY IS INEVITABLE - DON'T FIGHT IT -HILLARY IS
INEVITABLE - DON'T FIGHT IT -HILLARY IS INEVITABLE - DON'T FIGHT IT
-HILLARY IS INEVITABLE - DON'T FIGHT IT
Posted by: ImpeachNOW | November 15, 2007 03:36 PM
If you want to understand the essential indie clothing of the press
attempts to boost Obama at the expense of Clinton and create the
appearance of a horse race consider this. For the past week the press
has been alive with expressions of respect for the Giuliani master
strategy which apparently means he can lose the first four, yes the
first four, primaries and yet can still win the nomination by picking
up all the other states where he has massive leads. Conversely,
Clinton who has similar massive leads in every state except IA, and NH
if you don't think 15% is a big lead, is doomed if she loses IA or NH.
Am I alone in believing the press is being disingenuous here. In fact
in the democratic field she is the only candidate who could lose IA
and it makes absolutely no difference. If Edwards or Obama lose they
are done. Even narrow victories would probably constitute a loss. This
is the unique strategic advantage she possesses which seems to have
eluded all the pundits who are paid huge salaries to pontificate about
this stuff. Some know it of course but it would spoil a good story.
Posted by: johnbsmrk | November 15, 2007 03:47 PM
Hard to believe such a smart lady would let herself get sucked into
such a situation, unless...
Is Democratic front runner Hillary Clinton playing the "Under Dog"
role?
---------> http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=991
.
Posted by: PollM | November 15, 2007 03:50 PM
If you can't argue with facts, repeat, repeat, repeat the big lie as
above. There's plenty of ammo to fire back if Clinton starts on the
others. Her experience dates from being New York Senator period.
Before that she has the practice of law, a failed health insurance
program, more scandals between the two Clinton's than we can count and
all the old baggage too lengthly to go into here.
The "won't vote for Clinton" mass is not because of her gender or even
some of the few positions we can figure out, it is because of her cheap renters insurance and present history of evasions, flipflops, "too cute by half"
responses and a general reluctance to take questions from the audience
at her appearances and, above all, tell the truth.
The rest of the field has a chance this evening to debunk the
"inevitable" mantra cast by the media and her campaign by speaking the
truth and "outing" her when she fibs and flip flops. While they're add
it, they can ask just how much Mark Penn's firm was paid by Blackwater
to be a consultant? The list goes on and on and one.
America needs a President who can unite us and that certainly is
either Clinton. Also, maybe we can figure out who indeed is running.
Posted by: NoMugwump | November 15, 2007 03:51 PM
Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) is the leading advocate for freedom in
our nation's capital. As a member of the U.S. House of
Representatives, Dr. Paul tirelessly works for limited constitutional
government, low taxes, free markets, and a return to sound monetary
policies. He is known among his congressional colleagues and his
constituents for his consistent voting record. Dr. Paul never votes
for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by
the Constitution.
Border Security and Immigration Reform
The talk must stop. We must secure our borders now. A nation without
secure borders is no nation at all. It makes no sense to fight
terrorists learn chinese chicago when our own front door is left unlocked.
This is my six point plan:
Physically secure our borders and coastlines. We must do whatever it
takes to control entry into our country before we undertake
complicated immigration reform proposals.
Enforce visa rules. Immigration officials must track visa holders and
deport anyone who overstays their visa or otherwise violates U.S. law.
This is especially important when we recall that a number of 9/11
terrorists had expired visas.
No amnesty. Estimates suggest that 10 to 20 million people are in our
country illegally. That's a lot of people to reward for breaking our
laws.
No welfare for illegal aliens. Americans have welcomed immigrants who
seek opportunity, work hard, and play by the rules. But taxpayers
should not pay for illegal immigrants who use hospitals, clinics,
schools, roads, and social services.
End birthright citizenship. As long printed playing cards illegal immigrants know their
children born here will be citizens, the incentive to enter the U.S.
illegally will remain strong.
Pass true immigration reform. The current system is incoherent and
unfair. But current reform proposals would allow up to 60 million more
immigrants into our best life insurance according to the Heritage Foundation.
This is insanity.
Legal immigrants from all countries should face the same rules and
waiting periods.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/border-security-and-immigration-reform/
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/
Tea Party 07 - Ron Paul Mass Donation Day. ... On December 16th, 1773,
American colonists dumped tea into the Boston Harbor to protest an
oppressive tax. ...
http://www.teaparty07.com
**** Join us online December 16th ****
Posted by: US-Citizen | November 15, 2007 04:07 PM
Better to call a spade a spade than to keep up the charade.
http://unitedagainsthillary.wordpress.com
Posted by: sunwolf78 | November 15, 2007 04:07 PM
How strange it is that when Hillary gets body slammed by her opponents
of the Democrat nomination race, they begin to compare her to King
George.
Reason: It is a emo clothes She doesn't meassure up to the Democrat
candidates.
((PERIOD))
Posted by: im_timmaaay | November 15, 2007 04:07 PM
So if Hillary attacks Obama and Edwards, will Richardson rush to their
defense?
Posted by: srobinson2 | November 15, 2007 04:27 PM
With over 70% of women polling for Hillary, not because poker shape playing cards who she is,
but what she is (a woman), in this case it's safe to say Harry
Belafonte was wrong - the women are NOT smarter!
Posted by: kargovroom | November 15, 2007 04:31 PM
This article is so biased against Hillary Clinton that I am stunned.
Readers might want to reorient themselves to reality by checking out
this analysis of Clinton's current standing with the American people
in Forbes at
http://www.forbes.com/home/business/2007/11/14/clinton-president-democrats-cx-1115oxford.html
Posted by: ichief | November 15, 2007 05:06 PM
Why do these articles never mention when the debate is and on what
channel? If it's in there, it's too buried. It should be prominently
featured.
Posted by: messykat | November 15, 2007 05:15 PM
JOhn Edwards wears Gucci loafers and gets four hundred dollar
haircuts, but he's too tacky to be auto insurance This is why he playing cards promotion poll above 13 in national polls. The electorate, for the most part, do
not like this man, let alone trust him.
Posted by: audart | November 15, 2007 05:24 PM
messykat - CNN at 8pm
Posted by: pinechee | November 15, 2007 05:25 PM
go hillary!!!!!!!!!!!
rethugs and larry craig wannabees: beware. what you see tonight will
only the tip of the iceberg
Posted by: pinechee | November 15, 2007 05:28 PM
Edwards need to welcome the Queen to the Smackdown tonight.
He should bring a list of her 10 top lies, inconsistent positions with
citations.
"Ms. Clinton I have 10 documented inconsistent positions you have
taken, and chapter and verse citations. Can you explain emo style 1?"
"I brought extra copies if you want one, but I do not want to invade
your space (smirky smile)...."
Posted by: JaxMax | November 15, 2007 05:31 PM
Those who support Obama to be the next president are falling right
into the trap of the GOP's conspiracy. This country is not yet ready
for a black president . Devide and rule is the oldest trick in the
book by the Republicans.Their only chance to win is to have the Dem to
nominate OBama.I just don't understand why the Dem can not see it.
Posted by: johnycheng1 | November 15, 2007 05:52 PM
Those who support Obama to be the next president are falling right
into the trap of the GOP's conspiracy. This chinese tutor chicago is not yet ready
for a black president . Devide and rule is the oldest trick in the
book by the Republicans.Their only chance to win is to have the Dem to
nominate OBama.I just don't understand why the Dem can not see it.
Posted by: johnycheng1 | November 15, 2007 05:53 PM
What I found amusing is Democrats are deseprately trying to tear
Hillary down, while Republicans are deseprately trying to find the
best candidate to beat her, thus Macain rebounce. Check the latest Fox
News poll. It's all about Hillary. Politics, very entertaining.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national-primary.html
Posted by: kjlover46 | November 15, 2007 05:56 PM
Hillary is still the favorite candidate of the Republicans, for they
believe she would be easier to beat. She should stop attacking Bush,
and start campaigning against her opponents. Bush isn't running for
office.
Posted by: dunnhaupt | November 15, 2007 06:35 PM
The Dems should make sure they nominate the person most likely to
become elected. The Republicans have had 16 years now to hone their
attacks on the Clintons. From what I've seen the attacks are as
irrational and irrelevant as can be, though there are plenty of
Republican voters on board. The nation needs the entire infrastructure
of the executive branch overhauled yesterday, and the Dems cannot
afford to lose this election.
Posted by: glenbc | November 15, 2007 06:44 PM
Will everyone please stop whining. Hillary is inevitable because she
is the best candidate out there, among Democrats and Republicans.
She is smarter by far, more honest, nuanced, and most importantly for
a leader, realistic. Since when did PRAGMATISM become a dirty word in
this country? Her very pragmatic husband was a wondeful president and
most of the voting public thought so, so much so that they elected him
twice handily (not by slim margins) and would have elected him a third
time.
Get real and count your blessings you nay-sayers. We should be so
lucky to have her lead us.
poker size playing cards Hillary!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: feliciaczin | November 15, 2007 06:49 PM
Ah, yes, Barack Obama was the story heading into the debate because
you and the rest of the media were dead set to assure a competitive
race. I do like Obama but not this time around because of his very
limited experience. The news media should stop trying to get male
Democrats to join forces with media anchors/moderators to take down
Senator Clinton. Ir's the electorate, stupid, that should decide--not
the Blitzers and Williamses and the Russerts of this world.
See more, reflectivepundit.com
Posted by: bn1123 | November 15, 2007 07:02 PM
Hillary is head above her fellow partisan. The whole point is to
attack the current administration and the whole bunch of Republican
contenders (except for Representative Paul) who support Bush and,
incredibly, try to out-Bush each other in terms of both foreign and
domestic policies.
This is a time to quite the traditional gender bias, this is a time to
move ahead to make sure that finally the United States does what a
good number of democracies have done before: elect a female president
to change course.
For more on this, see: reflectivepundit.com
Posted by: bn1123 | November 15, 2007 07:27 PM
Mrs. Bill Clinton hasn't explained why she gave life insurance on healthcare
Posted by: im_timmaaay | November 15, 2007 07:47 PM
Question for all please: Why isn't Joe Biden getting more traction? He
seems completely electable to me. Great foreign policy background,
pragmatic on domestic policy, track record of bipartisan
success...help me understand why he is not doing better than low
single digit.
Thanks
Posted by: calbob1 | November 15, 2007 07:48 PM
Post a Comment
We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge
washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.
User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks
or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the
site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures"
by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we
will take steps home insurance block users who violate any of our posting
standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies
governing this site. Please review the full rules governing
commentaries and discussions.
Comments:
RSS FeedSubscribe to The Post
© 2006-2007 The Washington Post Company