Starting Gate: Mud Wrestling Leaves Nobody Looking Clean

3735103If the audience at last night's Democratic debate is any indication, Barack Obama should cruise to an easy win in the South Carolina primary on Saturday. But the intense personal animosity on display between the Illinois senator and Hillary Clinton probably isn't helpful to any of the three remaining candidates in the field, least of all Obama.

Reactions among primary partisans are likely to break down along familiar lines. Obama backers will see a tough response to stepped-up attacks by Clinton and her powerful surrogate campaigner, former President Bill Clinton. To their eyes, Obama is standing up to unfair attacks, setting the record straight and scoring points about attacks that are, in his view, "not factually accurate."

Clinton supporters will point to Obama's counter-attacks on Clinton as proof that his pledge to change politics is nothing more than a rhetorical device. When Obama responded to assertions made by the Clinton campaign that he had praised Ronald Reagan and his Republican ideas, he launched the first heavy broadside of the evening, saying he was involved in fighting those ideas as a community organizer while Clinton was "a corporate lawyer sitting on the board at Wal-Mart."

Clinton shot back that she had been in the public arena when Obama was "practicing law and representing your contributor ... in his slum landlord business in inner city Chicago." Clinton's response drew an audible groan of disapproval but the result of that exchange, and others, plays right into the Clinton campaign's broader strategy – to prevent Obama to restart the "movement" he launched in Iowa and sail to the nomination on a wave of good feelings and a transformative image and to get across the idea that Obama is just another political player.

That mission was at least partly accomplished last night, as Obama went toe-to-toe with Clinton on a deeply personal level and found himself involved in lengthy and confusing explanations about how the Illinois state legislature operates and why he chose so many times to vote "present" while serving in that body.

John Edwards, who is turning out to be something of a kingmaker in this process did not repeat his performances of the past when he aimed a great deal of his fire at Clinton. Instead, Edwards focused more on Obama, drawing him into arguments over those "present" votes and joining Clinton in criticizing Obama's health care plan. On Obama's habit of not voting, Edwards cast it as a politically opportune practice. "What if I had just not shown up to vote on things that really mattered to this country?" he asked. "It would have been safe for me politically. It would have been the careful and cautious thing to do, but I have a responsibility to take a position."

Edwards spent most of the first part of the debate trying to get a word in edgewise but once engaged, seemed to buttress Clinton's arguments about Obama's record and policy proposals. The Illinois senator was reduced to explanations like this : "In Illinois, oftentimes you vote present in order to indicate that you had problems with a bill that otherwise you might be willing to vote for. And oftentimes you would have a strategy that would help move the thing forward." It wasn't quite to the level of John Kerry's "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it," but it illustrates the problems that arise for legislators running for president.

Should Obama win on Saturday, as is widely expected, the race will move into the critically important February 5th states where voters who may just be really starting to pay attention to the contests will have their say. The more caustic the contest becomes the more like a traditional campaign it seems, something which does not benefit Obama.

The Real Star? The three Democrats were on stage and President Bush was the primary focus of their complaints last night but Republican John McCain took center stage for part of the debate when Edwards predicted that the Arizona Senator will likely become the Republican nominee. Bush's name was mentioned 27 times while McCain's name came up 15 times during the course of the night.

Going Forward, It's The Economy, Stupid: Republican pollster David Winston, a CBS News election analyst, provides some more breakdown of the South Carolina results, including doubts about Mike Huckabee's future and the looming issue of the economy:

Underlying John McCain's close primary victory over Mike Huckabee in South Carolina were three key factors.

For Mike Huckabee, who predicted a South Carolina victory, his loss raises questions about his campaign. This should have been a state tailor-made for a Huckabee win. Exit polls showed that in South Carolina, as in Iowa, 60% of Republican voters identified themselves as evangelicals. Equally interesting is the fact that Huckabee performed at roughly the same level with this important primary group. In Iowa, he got 45% of the evangelical vote; in South Carolina, he got 43%. In New Hampshire and Michigan, the evangelical vote had been more evenly distributed where he only got 28% and 29% respectively. What changed was that McCain went from 10% of the evangelical vote in Iowa to 27% in South Carolina. This would suggest that Huckabee, to regain momentum, has to start expanding beyond the evangelical base.

In South Carolina, exit polls showed that the self-identified Republican vote was almost even between the two frontrunners. Huckabee got 32% of this vote while McCain got 31%. This was similar to New Hampshire where McCain edged out Romney among registered Republicans by 37-33 margin. However, in Michigan , Romney won Republicans by a 41-27 margin over McCain. In Iowa it was a similar story, where Huckabee (35%) and Romney (26%) did much better among Republicans than McCain (12%). As we go into states with closed primaries which allow only registered Republicans, the obvious question which trend will prevail? To date, the first four caucus/primary results have given us an unclear picture.

After all the initial discussion by some about what was the key issue for Republicans – was it gay marriage, Mormonism, immigration – South Carolina continued to reflect the results seen in previous exit polls. Once again, the economy emerged as the top issue. Clearly, the economy is not just a regional issue but tops the issue list across the county. The east – New Hampshire (31%), the Midwest – Michigan (55%), the south – South Carolina (40%), and the west – Nevada (37%). What is less clear is which candidate voters have the most confidence in to handle the issue of the economy. In New Hampshire, McCain was ahead of everyone by 20 points; in Michigan Romney won economic voters by 13%; and in South Carolina, Huckabee and McCain were tied. Going into Florida the fight over who has the advantage on the issue of the economy will be front and center, and Giuliani has refocused his effort on economic policy for his stand there.

Finally, having won the key primary states of New Hampshire and South Carolina, McCain goes into the Sunshine State with some momentum. But with Romney's Michigan and Nevada wins, Huckabee's Iowa victory, Giuliani's Florida strategy and the uncertain situation of Thompson's campaign as a result of his third place finish in South Carolina, the Republican nomination is still very much up in air.