Pure Horserace: A Spouse In The Spotlight

Elizabeth Edwards Challenges Hillary Clinton — Online And In New Hampshire

(CBS)  Elizabeth Edwards has been one of the strongest advocates of her husband's campaign — Democratic activists love her and she's even to the left of John Edwards on some issues. Though she's already a highly visible presence on the campaign trail, Mrs. Edwards is getting more attention than normal this week, and it doesn't look like the campaign minds.

In an interview with Salon.com posted on Tuesday, Edwards directly criticized Hillary Clinton, saying John Edwards would be a more forceful advocate for women than the former first lady. "I'm sympathetic — she wants to be commander in chief. But she's just not as vocal a women's advocate as I want to see. John is," Edwards said. "The question is, what does her campaign tell you about how she'll govern? And I'm not convinced she'd be as good an advocate for women."

Edwards also criticized Clinton's health care plan: "And then she describes some cost-saving things, which John also supports, but she acts like that's going to make healthcare affordable to everyone. And she knows it won't."

Bold words? Perhaps. But while John Edwards would risk being attacked for being sexist were he to question Clinton's credentials on women's issues, his wife is immune to such charges. Still, it wouldn't come as a shock if the campaign tried to bottle up Elizabeth for bit, at least until the small furor over her words died down. Instead, they're doing the exact opposite.

Starting today, the campaign is airing a new ad in New Hampshire featuring Elizabeth Edwards. In the commercial, she says her husband "has an unbelievable toughness, particularly about other people." She adds: "You're not going to outsmart him. He works harder than any other human being I know. Always has."

Perhaps not coincidentally, New Hampshire is Clinton's strongest state — and also where Edwards is performing worst among the four states that will hold the opening contests of the '08 campaign. A new University of New Hampshire poll shows 8 percent of likely Democratic voters backing Edwards, putting him in fourth place behind not only Clinton (33 percent) and Barack Obama (25 percent), but also Bill Richardson (10 percent).

The Edwards campaign denies that Elizabeth is launching an orchestrated attack on Clinton. "Elizabeth's not going after anybody," one of Edwards' top advisers, Jonathan Prince, said in a Wednesday conference call. "Elizabeth is out there advocating on behalf of her husband." But he added that John Edwards had "no better surrogate" than his wife and that she would "a big part" of the campaign down the road.

Elizabeth is also expected to campaign in New Hampshire for her husband, who is returning to Iowa — where he's still running strong — after his three-day tour of impoverished areas wraps up today. Does the campaign see Elizabeth as the best person to take on Clinton in her New Hampshire stronghold? They may not be willing to say it, but their actions suggest so. — David Miller


Strict Commitment But No Litmus Tests For Rudy: Rudy Giuliani has made quite the push on judges this week with an aggressive effort to calm the nerves of some social conservatives who may be nervous about his candidacy. Yesterday, Giuliani unveiled his Justice Advisory Committee, one jam-packed with very conservative legal eagles.

Former Solicitor General Ted Olson is on the team, as is Federalist Society co-founder Steven Calabresi and former Deputy AG Larry Thompson. One of the best-known names might be Miguel Estrada, who gained a measure of fame by being one of President Bush's judicial nominees filibustered by Senate Democrats.

Giuliani coupled the announcement with some public statements on his judicial philosophy, including a widely circulated article written for the conservative Web site Pajamas Media in which he reiterated his commitment to appoint "strict constructionist judges who interpret the law instead of legislating from the bench."

Giuliani went on the write, "Some people believe judges should ‘evolve' the law to reflect short-term political and cultural trends. I disagree. The individuals responsible for updating our laws are our elected representatives. Federal judges — who are appointed for life — are responsible for interpreting our laws. And the Constitution can only be amended by the American people."

The campaign is seeking to convince conservative primary voters that while the candidate himself may be in favor of abortion rights and has advocated gun control in the past, he will appoint justices who are unlikely to find such justification in the Constitution itself for such positions.

Taking that message to Iowa voters today, Giuliani said he would look to appoint Supreme Court Justices in the mold of President's Bush's choices of John Roberts and Samuel Alito — two picks that have pleased conservatives thus far on the high court. But, according to The Associated Press, Giuliani told reporters he would have no specific litmus tests. "Abortion is not a litmus test. Roe v. Wade is not a litmus test. No particular case is a litmus test. That's not the way to appoint Supreme Court justices or any judge," Giuliani said.

So, no litmus tests for Giuliani when it comes to nominating judges except, of course, that they be "strict constructionists" who are unlikely to see certain things, like abortion, as rights in the Constitution. Despite the big-name conservative legal shakers behind his effort, these social issues remain a problem for Giuliani, presenting a thicket of thorny terrain to navigate.

In the very first Republican debate, Giuliani said it would be "OK" with him if the courts upheld the Roe v. Wade decision and "OK" if it was repealed. That spurred a lot of chatter about his commitment to the issue. This week's push on judges looks to be a more sophisticated version of the same position. — Vaughn Ververs


Romney's Reputation Under Fire: Republican Mitt Romney's surge to the top of the polls in Iowa and New Hampshire is unquestionably good for his presidential hopes, but by rising to the top so early, it's also left him with a big target on his back — and it looks like his opponents are now taking aim.

Taking a page from Karl Rove's playbook, two charges waged against Romney this week target two of his supposed strengths: His anchorman-like looks and his squeaky-clean family values. When the Romney campaign released its full second-quarter spending report a few days ago, it included a $300 charge for makeup applied at a California beauty salon — echoing the story of John Edwards' $400 haircuts. And like Edwards, Romney might soon see the "pretty boy" label start to stick.

Unless, of course, the "dirty" label some are trying to slap on Romney doesn't stick first. On July 5, Citizens for Community Values said Romney's criticisms of pornography are hypocritical because when Romney served on the board of directors of the Marriott hotel chain, the company allowed customers to purchase pay-per-view pornographic films from their rooms. The story has had some staying power, and on Tuesday the Nation — a liberal magazine that's no friend to Romney — detailed a more extensive campaign by religious organizations to discredit the former Massachusetts governor's stance on "family issues." Meanwhile, another group, the Family Research Council, is attempting to build support for Fred Thompson.

So-called value voters are expected to be coveted by both Romney and Thompson, especially over the next few months. If these are the opening salvos of the fight between the two, we could be in for an entertaining fall. — David Miller


Who's On The Other End Of That Line? We're all familiar with those organizational names that accompany the constant stream of polls we see these days — CBS News, Gallup, AP, etc. What you might not know is the role played by those men and women behind the scenes, the ones you've spoken to, if you've ever been polled. There's more to the science of surveying than you might think — and more research about the intricacies of the operation. Check out the latest Poll Positions column by Kathy Frankovic, director of surveys for CBS News, to get a glimpse behind the scenes.


Editor's note: Pure Horserace is a daily update of political news as interpreted by the political observers at CBSNews.com. Click here to sign up for the e-mail version.

[SIDNEYWILLIAMSMD]

WORDS OF ADVICE FROM WINSTON CHURCHILL:

I would say to the House, as I said to those who have joined this Government: 'I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears, and sweat.' We have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us many, many long months of struggle and suffering. You ask, what is our policy? I can say: It is to wage war, by sea, land and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us: to wage war against a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy. You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word: It is victory, victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory, however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival. Winston Churchill Speech in the House of Commons, after taking office as Prime Minister (13 May 1940)

[tcoleman12]

I've gotta tell you, CBS is going to hear from the Clinton Camp about that picture used for this article.

Looks like Mrs. Edwards is the hit man for the campaign. Old Lib trick... can't fire back at her, she's had cancer.

[ioweign]

Winston Churchill Speech in the House of Commons, after taking office as Prime Minister (13 May 1940)
Posted by doctorwho4 at 03:05 PM : Jul 18, 2007

I knew Winston Churchill and believe me, you are NO Winston Churchill!

Oh Brother - get a life doctorwho4!

[infidel_us]

Old Lib trick... can't fire back at her, she's had cancer.
Posted by tcoleman12 at 03:18 PM : Jul 18, 2007

So true. She can say whatever the hell she wants and if anyone tries to come back on her, well they're just evil. These libs have no soul or conscience.

[realpatriot1]

infidel_US,

I'm ok with attacking Mr. or Mrs. Edwards. It's the dead son that's below the belt.

[gunownerdan]

Our government has been hijacked by a democrat/republican duopoly controlled by greed and big money.
Congress is nothing more than a safe-house for criminals and prostitutes.
People who profit from war, imprisonment, and torture are now controlling America.
But who cares?
We've got plenty of celebrities and sports to be worried about!

[pepperp1]

I do not care what Elizabeth Edwards has to say, it is meaningless. God bless her, but just because she has cancer does not give her an informed voice on the other candidates, now if she wants to throw her boy toy out and take his place fine then I'll listen, otherwise it is a catty behavior that her coward of a husband sent her to do, unflattering just as unflattering as her elevating Ann Coulter to serious participants in our electoral processes, desperate comes to mind.

[tnt1954]

never have so many owed so much money to so
few. how is national debt in all other
countries of the world? ours is 8 trillion
and growing. what is france's? switzerland's?
sweden's? norway's? england's? ireland's?
haiti's? russia's? what is the combined
debt of all govts. of the world? what is
the combined debt of all individuals in the
world? what is the debt of the united nations?
is anybody really in 'the black'? everyone
has great ideas with no real money to back it.
a euphemism for slavery is volunteer work.
enslaving each other to stay alive another
summer. co-ops. communism is a giant cooperative
in many ways. kibbutzim. communes. plantations?
takes a long time to grow a field of corn.
doesn't just sprout fully ripe overnight, comrades. i recommend victory gardens.

[pepperwood2]

CHECK this out. DON'T MISS IT! Put this in your pipe & smoke on it. We're finally going to get our way. Hope to see you there. 2008 can't come, soon enough for me. History is in the making. Happy days are here again.

Democratic Presidential Candidates Pander to Homosexual Lobby. Debate to be devoted solely to gay issues. HRC is calling it a historic event.

The 90-minute event is scheduled for Aug. 9 in Los Angeles. According to HRC, all major Democratic and Republican presidential candidates were invited. The list of those who have accepted: Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y.; Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.; former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C.; former Sen. Mike Gravel, D-Alaska; Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio; and Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.

"This event, which marks the first time in history the major presidential candidates will address a live GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender) television audience."

Gravel published an open letter to the GLBT community.

"I promise to use the HRC forum to advance the gay rights agenda and educate the American public that gay rights is one of the great moral issues of our time," he said. "I will call upon all Americans to stop listening to the televangelists, psychologists and politicians and to do what is right & feels good".

In other words, Mackey said, the GAY AGENDA will come across loud and clear.