Advertisement

"I do not expect that passion to be transferred. Senator Clinton is unique, and your relationships with her are unique."

— Barack Obama, to Hillary Clinton's donors, mult., 6/27.

White House 2008

GENERAL ELECTION

1. Long Live Our Glorious Dear Nominee In The Democratic Republic of the U.S.

Both John McCain and Barack Obama "reacted cautiously" 6/26 to the news that Pres. Bush would be "easing economic sanctions against North Korea, a world troublespot one of them will inherit after the next presidential election." Bush's plan, which would also remove the DPRK "from the U.S. terrorism blacklist," comes after the leadership of "Dear Leader" Kim Jong-Il "handed over a long-awaited accounting of its nuclear work" to PRC officials.

Bush's response to the act, which "fulfilled a key step in the denuclearization process," is part of an "incremental 'actions for actions'" policy "recently adopted" by the administration. Both McCain, who "has earned accolades from some conservatives for maintaining an even harder line that Bush," and Obama, who "would take a more flexible course" under the "belief that dialogue should underpin U.S. diplomacy," may nevertheless undertake the same policy "regardless" (AP, 6/26).

McCain, who "has generally toed the Bush administration line" on the DPRK and "previously criticized" Obama "for saying he would meet with leaders of enemy states" like Kim, "maintained that any agreement be verifiable" 6/25. McCain: "If we are unable to fully verify the declaration submitted today and if I am not satisfied with the verification mechanisms developed, I would not support easing the sanctions on North Korea."

Obama "took a swipe" at the more hard-line stance 6/25, saying the DPRK's "nuclear weapons programs 'only expanded while we refused to talk'" (Ellis, NYTimes.com, 6/26). Obama: "In the words of Ronald Reagan, we need to trust but verify. But this issue of nonproliferation is critical. We've let it slip away for too long."

McCain "has favored a tough approach," largely shaped "by his own experience fighting in Vietnam," and even "waxed poetic about the 'Forgotten War'" on the Korean Peninsula at a Fresno, CA town hall this week. Obama, who "has spoken broadly about boosting diplomatic engagement in other countries," stated 6/25 he favored "bilateral negotiations with Pyongyang in place of the "six-party talks" alongside the RoK, PRC, Russia and Japan.

Nevertheless, if "history is any guide," both perspectives "may lead to the same place." Ex-DPRK nnegotiatorCouncil on Foreign Relations VP Gary Samore: "As long as the strategy looks like it's working in the sense of limiting North Korea's (nuclear) capacity, the next president is going to be so focused on dealing with problems in the Middle East no one is going to want to pick a fight in northeast Asia" (AP, 6/26).

No Talking Snowmen Need Apply

The Commission on Presidential Debates unveiled a "formal proposal" 6/26 for the "three 90-minute debates it's seeking this fall" between Obama and McCain, featuring a "more open format to encourage the candidates to talk more to each other directly." Two of the three events would have a "less formal, more conversational talk-show format," in which both candidates would "sit at a table" and debate in "eight 10-minute-long segments, each devoted to one issue" (Thomma, McClatchy, 6/26).

Among the "more interesting alterations are plans for a single moderator," instead of "a journalists' panel," in an effort to "generate lengthy discussions between the candidates" (Phillips, nytimes.com, 6/26). The plan calls for the moderator, "who hasn't been selected yet," to "pose an opening question, then prompt the candidates to discuss it themselves" (McClatchy, 6/26).

The first and third debates, on 9/26 in Oxford, MS and 10/15 on L.I., NY, will be in this style, and focus on domestic and foreign policy, respectively. The second, set for 10/7 in Nashville, TN, "will follow a town-hall format, with questions selected from audience/members," and "will also solicit questions to be submitted over the Internet" and read by the moderator. CPD co-chairs Paul Kirk Jr. and Frank Fahrenkopf Jr. said they "seriously debated" any of the debates "would involve YouTube questions or video." Kirk: "My own view is that's for Sunday shows. We hope it's more of a discussion of the issues, not gotcha." Both argue the "alterations" will help "avoid the stale, sound-bite answers candidates frequently fall back on," but they "have yet to hear back from either camp." It remains "highly likely" both will "try to negotiate details along the way (NYTimes.com, 6/26).

"Perhaps unintentionally," the new, podium-free arrangements "would neutralize Obama's height advantage"; Obama is 6'1" to McCain's 5'9" (McClatchy, 6/26). In terms of style, what the two "do with those natural attributes" can "make a difference" debating. College of Wooster prof. Denise Bostdorff: "Voters need to be able to look at candidates and say to themselves, 'Yes, I could see this person being president' - and part of that is the way they speak."

Bostdorff says McCain, who "speaks in short sentences and in very realistic terminology," communicates he "knows the world as it is," while Obama's "more transitional" style "goes on to describe how it could be." Consultant Ginny Pulos says "Obama has an advantage" when "it comes to body language," saying McCain "has obviously had some coaching" (Orr, Cleveland Plain Dealer, 6/26).

It's Time For An Intervention

Perhaps similarly, both Obama and McCain "see a bigger government role in the economy" in a "variety of areas - from oil-futures trading and investment banking to climate change and home mortgages." Americans retain a "growing disenchantment with where the country is headed," a sentiment both McCain and Obama "have responded to" with "rhetoric that, at times, sounds similar." Both have "blamed speculators for driving up oil prices," promised "new regulations of futures trading," and proposed "a bigger government role in stemming home foreclosures." Ex-Clinton economist/Brookings fellow Martin Baily: "There's a certain amount of disillusionment with free trade and globalization, and the deregulation movement. It's a genuine shift in sentiment toward a more active role for government."

While the election of either candidate would likely spell "a shift away from President George W. Bush's anti-regulation ideology," the "government's reach would probably expand more with Obama," especially with the Dem ranks in Congress "likely to grow" post-November. AEI analyst Robert Hahn: "If Obama is elected, there will be strong pressure from the Congress and executive to regulate more."

Nevertheless, says Hahn, McCain is "clearly more populist than Bush," which "often times," means "calling for more regulation." With both saying they "favor increased regulation of Wall Street in the wake of the" Bear Stearns debacle, a 6/23 Bloomberg/LA Times poll found Americans "favor more aggressive regulation of Wall Street by a margin of about 3-2" (Miller/Woellert, Bloomberg, 6/27).

Te Quiero Que Me Quieras

McCain and Obama are scheduled to make "back-to-back appearances" 6/28 "before the annual meeting of" the Natl. Assoc of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials, a "non-partisan group" representing over 5.5K officeholders among the "fastest-growing voting bloc in that nation." The appearances come after a 6/26 NALEO report predicting "a record-breaking turn-out of at least" 9.2M Hispanic voters "this fall." Obama backer/NALEO pres Adolfo Carrion: "Latinos really represent the political swing vote." At a 6/24 NALEO luncheon, "a coolness toward Obama was palpable." Santa Ana, CA councilor Michelle Martinez said when several Dems "announced their support for Obama, 'I was the only person at my table clapping." Martinez: "There's still some sensitivity in the Latino community" (Kiely, USA Today, 6/27).

The group also released a report "showing that Hispanic voters are most concerned about the economy, the Iraq war, access to affordable health care, education issues, and immigration reform" (Moscoso, Cox, 6/27). Although McCain and Obama "disagree on how to reshape" the failed '07 plan for a guest-worker program, "their overall differences are not that drastic," and "highlight the core constituencies" each "needs to please."

McCain, who saw the package he endorsed fall "victim to the firestorm of opposition it set off in the conservative blogosphere and among anti-immigration groups," now says he "got the American people's message that they want border security first." He has since co-sponsored "enforcement-only bills introduced by immigration hard-liners." SEIU exec VP Eliseo Medina: "He's retreated to the most anti-working-family, anti-immigrant sentiment held by the most conservative elements of his party." Any McCain admin plan that involves "compromising" with Dem leaders "could provoke" further resistance "from his own party."

Obama, who "may not have McCain's track record on immigration reform," has "earned plaudits for taking a moderate approach" as an "honest broker" to last year's bill, seeking to reconcile "the competing interests of the business community and workers' rights groups" in a "major amendment." The amendment, "his biggest contribution" to the package, would have made "the mandatory employment verification system easier for businesses to use" while strengthening "employment-discrimination protections." Natl. Assoc of Home Builders lobbyist Jenna Hamilton: "I think Obama did get that you needed a program that was workable for employers" (Caruso, National Journal, 6/28 issue).

In The Detroit Lions' Den

McCain "isn't playing it safe by sticking to friendly turf" as he travels "to sell voters his plans for energy independence," traveling 6/27 "to one of Ohio's Democratic strongholds," a GM plant in Lordstown. McCain previously traveled to a stretch of the Santa Barbara coast "fouled by a 1969 oil spill" immediately after "reversing his longtime opposition to offshore oil exploration," and spoke not far from Yucca Mountain, NV, "site of a proposed nuclear waste storage facility," of his plans "to build 45 nuclear reactors."

Dems "were puzzled by McCain's venue choice" in OH, with Gov. Ted Strickland (D) saying he "couldn't imagine McCain gaining political traction" an a region "devastated by Bush administration policies." UAW Local 1714 president David Green, of the "union that represents the plant's workers, said the workers "disliked McCain's opposition to minimum wage increases" and support of NAFTA, but said they would "give him a polite hearing." Obama has criticized McCain's energy proposals as "cheap gimmicks." McCain spokesperson Douglas Holtz-Eakin says Obama's energy plan "caters too much to special interests," like IL ethanol producers. Holtz-Eakin: "This is simply a person adhering to the positions of his backers" (Eaton, Cleveland Plain Dealer, 6/26).

Defective Defects

Though the "dust has barely settled" on the "rollercoaster" primary battle between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, Dem leaders "are being bombarded with advice on how to fix a system that ended with dissension and lingering bitterness." Nevertheless, demands to "get rid of" superdelegates or "chuck the caucuses" suggest "something is broken," which "begs the question": how could the system "be characterized as defective" when it produced Obama as nominee, the candidate Dem rules "have been written to benefit?"

Strategist Christopher Hull: "This year, the Democrats' system did what it was supposed to do - it allowed an insurgent candidate with grassroots appeal and organization to defeat the party insider." Hull says rules such as the proportional distribution of delegates "may be 'a terrible idea - it's the cause of weak governments in Europe," but that they are "also fair," with "no movement to adopt the GOP practice of winner-take-all." One likely fix: "both sides agree the primary season started too early" (Halloran, U.S. News and World Report, 6/26).

EMILY's Dissed

With a disappointing series of congressional endorsements and with HRC's "narrow loss" to Obama, EMILY's List, "one of the most powerful progressive fundraising machines" in Dem politics, has seen the "very core" of its strategy - "that women will back female candidates in the name of equality" - called "into question." In the '06 midterm races, the group "faltered" as "74% of the challengers it backed lost their general election contests," with just "eight in all" of their endorsed candidates winning in a "stellar election" for Dems.

While HRC natl. co-chair/EL pres Ellen Malcolm says the group "invests in candidates far and wide, fully expecting to lose more than it wins," the '08 race, "the first time that EMILY's List had backed a presidential candidate," saw the group draw fire from Dems "for employing divisive tactics." Pro-life Rep. Marcy Kaputur (D-OH): "They've been too narrow. I represent women who organize unions, carry mail on their backs, raise children, fight harassment in the workplace. They love their husbands and sons. And with EMILY's List, I always felt there was a class-based, gender-based divide." The formal backing of Clinton reflected the "divide between Baby Boomer women (the foundation of EMILY's List) and their daughters, who, according to exit poll data, came out in force in the primaries for Obama."

Though Malcolm "balks" that HRC's "failure to connect with younger female voters" means the group needs "a message overhaul," the group also made a "series of moves on Clinton's behalf that caused friction" with fellow Dems. The group began by calling into question Obama's "committment to reproductive health rights," getting into a spat with Planned Parenthood of IL, "which defended Obama." Planned Parenthood of IL VP Pam Sutherland: "The way they needed to peel people off is to find something wrong with Barack Obama."

This spring, they also clashed with NARAL "after it endorsed Obama" 5/14, "when he was gaining on Clinton in the delegate count." Malcolm said the endorsement was "tremendously disrespectful," despite her own organization endorsing HRC so early it "would inevitably divert resources from its congressional candidates." Malcolm "went even further" in 4/08, suggesting her group "might not back" Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Claire McCaskill (D-MO) after they backed Obama. UVA prof Larry Sabato said the actions "risked diminishing EMILY's List's political influence," with "costs to not playing well in the sandbox."

Malcolm has "hinted" the group might work to also elect men, but said "younger voters and donors are not her 'market segment," despite the fact that exit polls showed Obama capturing young female voters by "huge margins." Malcolm: "Am I going to craft a message for 18-year-olds right now and try to raise money from them? No" (Vaida/Skalka, National Journal, 6/28 issue).

Editor-in-Chief: Amy Walter

Executive Editor: John Mercurio

Managing Editor: Quinn McCord

Senior Editors: Maura O'Brien, Tim Sahd, and Reid Wilson

TV Editor: Abby Livingston

Senior Writers: Holly Noe and Rachelle Douillard-Proulx

Staff Writers: Ian Faerstein, Sean J. Miller, Steven Shepard, and Felicia Sonmez

Online Producer: Carrie Dindino

Executive Assistant: Meredith Nettles

Associate Writers: Cyra Master, Michelle Price, Beth Sussman, and Kurtis Lee

Registering with NationalJournal.com enables subscribers to view our up-to-the-minute analysis and unparalleled coverage of Congress, politics and policy in its entirety. If you would like to continue reading please click on the "Register" button to the right and create a username and password, then activate your subscription(s).

This one-time registration is required to access subscription content on NationalJournal.com and will only take a moment. Subscribe now: Call (800) 424-2921 or email subscriptions@nationaljournal.com.