All Blog Posts from Horserace

A detailed examination of the differences between the Democratic presidential candidates on the minutia of the federal tax code was not a part of Wednesday night’s debate. Then again, policy disagreements between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton don’t have much to do with the campaign at this point either.

If there’s one thing that has been proven after a years worth of campaigning, it’s that the differences between the Democratic candidates are far more about tone, likeability and personality than on policy differences. After a debate focusing predominantly on Obama’s problems in those areas, however, there’s suddenly a great outcry to for more examination on the impact of the candidate’s tax policies on the price of tea in China.

Obama led the outrage yesterday. “Last night we set a new record,” he told supporters. “It took us 45 minutes … before we heard about health care … forty-five minutes before we heard about Iraq … forty-five minutes before we heard about jobs. That's how Washington is." Anyone who’s sat through a subcommittee hearing on health care knows that Washington is a little different than that, but it is what this Democratic race is all about at the moment.

Oddly enough, Obama didn’t seem to mind it all that much when Clinton was going through a week’s worth of cavity searches that exposed the falsehoods she was telling regarding her visit to Bosnia in the 1990s. Nonexistent sniper fire doesn’t have a thing to do with the future course of the Iraq war but it did say something about the candidate and helped reinforce the perception that she’s willing to stretch the truth an awfully long ways.

Right now, the debate is not being conducted as much for the benefit of voters in Pennsylvania, North Carolina or Indiana. It’s about convincing superdelegates that one candidate has a better shot at capturing the White House than the other. And, in the realm of health care, the war and jobs, isn’t that job number one for either party’s policy agenda? Obama’s relationships with Rev. Wright and William Ayres or his comments on small-town America do say something about him and his candidacy. How he deals with such questions says even more.

Obama seemed to have a bad night on Wednesday but there’s no signs it’s harmed him among voters yet to participate in the primaries, among the superdelegates who will ultimately decided the nomination or even among the broader electorate for the general election. In fact, he may very well end up being thrilled to have been asked these questions well before November.

Read full post…

Hillary Clinton got the kind of debate conditions she wanted in Philadelphia last night. A heavy focus on Barack Obama’s problem spots in the campaign (such as those “bitter” comments and Rev. Wright) dominated the entire first half. There was even a “surprise” twist thrown in when Obama was grilled about his relationship with former Weather Underground radical William Ayers.

This was the ground of Clinton’s choosing, a debate as much about the issue of electability as the issues of the day. And Obama withered a bit in the spotlight. Clearly prepared for the “bitter” debate (and the piling on from Clinton), he seemed taken by surprise as that segued into more discussions about Jeremiah Wright and Ayers. About the only “skeleton” kept in the closet was indicted Chicago developer Tony Rezko.

It was in so many ways almost a perfect setup for Clinton’s remaining argument in the Democratic primary contest – that she is the most electable. That’s what she is trying to convince voters of in Pennsylvania, Indiana, Kentucky and West Virginia. More importantly, it’s the argument she’d like to convince those all-important superdelegates of before this process is over.

Two things worked against Clinton in that drive last night. First, for the first time (in at least a very long time), she emphatically agreed that Obama could defeat John McCain in November. When first asked the question, she tried to dodge it, talking about her confidence that Democrats would win in November. But when pressed about whether Obama can win, she said “yes, yes, yes.”

But what may hurt Clinton most is the one thing working in her favor – Obama’s stumbles. She didn’t appear elegant in piling on last night but she didn’t exactly overplay her hand either. But the sight of the front-runner sweating under the spotlight may lead to an increased desire among Democratic leaders to get this nomination process over with quickly. And the only way to do that is for Obama to win it and avoid an August convention fight.

If there is lasting damage to the party’s ability to unify for the general election, it’s far more likely to come from a Clinton nomination. Obama has generated genuine excitement and opened up a flood of new donors to the party. His support is passionate and comes from two groups – blacks and young voters – likely to be most turned off should they feel the nomination is somehow taken unjustly by Clinton (i.e. superdelegates). He leads in delegates, the popular vote and total contests won.

Party leaders do not want to find themselves in a position where they appear to be handing the nomination to Clinton after all that’s happened in this race. The damage to the party in that case might last far beyond November. Events like last night’s debate might increase the sense of urgency to put this primary process behind them.

Read full post…