Looks like Hillary's sometimes hard to believe foreign policy claims may be finally catching up with her. For instance, on March 17th this year Hillary said of her trip to Bosnia that:

"I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."

But now there are several accounts, a photo, and video that all directly contradict this statement. This comes from the Washington Post's "Fact Checker":

Far from running to an airport building with their heads down, Clinton and her party were greeted on the tarmac by smiling U.S. and Bosnian officials. An eight-year-old Moslem girl, Emina Bicakcic, read a poem in English. An Associated Press photograph of the greeting ceremony, above, shows a smiling Clinton bending down to receive a kiss.

Please read the WaPo review of the Bosnia claim before responding to this post. It's a complete obliteration of the account given by Hillary Clinton and her campaign.  The WaPo Factcheck apparently has a Pinocchio rating system and they give Clinton's Bosnia trip claim their worst rating of "four Pinocchios."

Clinton's tale of landing at Tuzla airport "under sniper fire" and then running for cover is simply not credible. Photographs and video of the arrival ceremony, combined with contemporaneous news reports, tell a very different story. Four Pinocchios. 

Let me just say this before you respond to this post: I think Hillary Clinton has some legitimate claims to more foreign policy experience over Barack Obama. There's no question she played a more active role in the White House than many, if not all First Ladies, and as a Senator of 7 years she's certainly had more opportunities to weigh in on foreign policy (such as...Iraq...Iran...). 

However, she's has totally undermined this slight advantage but completely overstating and embellishing what she did and what positions she held. I would have a lot more respect for her if she spent more time saying something like this: "I can't take credit for peace in Northern Ireland, there were many more people who gave much more than I did. But I tried to play a role in the process as much as I could, such as bringing women's groups together on a few occasions. Being close to that process through the work of my husband and through the small roles I played makes me better prepared for the reality of diplomatic relations in the White House." 

Instead, we get Hillary the embellisher. She is desperate because she's losing the primary and desperate people take desperate measures. Her campaign has embellished her record (or changed her recorded positions in the past to suit today's issues) and by doing so they've set her up for a big fall, either now or in the general election.

And, this isn't going to help Clinton's "honesty" ratings either, which are already disturbingly low for a Presidential candidate: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/Honesty_gap.html

If you enjoyed this post, please share with other readers by clicking on the 'recommend this' link.

What's the significance of of the Richardson endorsement of Barack Obama?  

One thing is very tangible, Obama picks up another superdelegate endorsement. According to the good folks at demconwatch, Obama continues to cut into Hillary's suyperdelegate lead. It is now down to only 35 when it was in 90s one month ago. 

Another thing that will be interesting to watch - does Richardson begin actively campaigning and fundraising for Obama in the remaining states? I would assume that he would. That's one of the ways that John Edwards won the VP nod in 2004. People might start calling Obama-Richardson the new "dream ticket."  

Richardson's endorsement also gives Obama some fresh and needed good news. 

Probably the biggest question of the day: what's the impact of this endorsement on the other party elders, superdelegates, and voters? I would say, of those three groups, the impact on voters will be minimal to non-existent, including Latino voters. Endorsements by fellow politicians rarely have any meaningful impact on voters choices (in my opinion).  But the impact this could have on the superdelegates and party elders could be huge, depending on the respect that Richardson truely has within the party. 

Will others who've held back from endorsing Obama now feel free to do so? Is this the beginning of a flood of endorsements to Obama because superdelegates feel that Obama is going to win the nomination anyway and the only way to end the ugliness of the primary is to back Obama?

Another scenario would be that some big superdelegate is out there who has been leaning Hillary and will try to balance out the Richardson endorsement by going public for her. Edwards would be big but highly unlikely given that his staff, donors, and backers have mostly unified around Obama. Maybe Mike Gravel?

My opinion: Being an Obama supporter, I've got the built-in Obama bias but my sense is that Richardson is highly respected in the party and his endorsement is huge in the impact it will have with other superdelegates. When I heard that Edwards was going on the Tonight Show last night I also thought that he's getting back in the news at this might be a sign that he's going to re-engage in the Democratic primary process. We'll see if he makes a move too.

If Richardson is campaigning and fundraising and making the talk show circuits, I've got to think that the other supers are going to start making a move as well. 


If you enjoyed this post, please share with others by clicking on the recommend this link.
 
 

Obama gave another speech major speech this week, today (Wednesday morning) in the military town of Fayetteville, North Carolina. The Raleigh News & Observer reports:

Barack Obama said today in Fayetteville that the United States must end the war in Iraq to meet its real security challenges.

"I will offer a clean break from the failed policies and politics of the past," Obama said. "Nowhere is that break more badly needed than Iraq."

"I will set a new goal on Day 1" as commander in chief, he said. "I will end this war."

But perhaps the line of the day that grabbed the attention of the press was this little zinger aimed at Republicans and John McCain:

"We have a security gap when candidates say they will follow Osama bin Laden to the gates of hell, but refuse to follow him where he actually is," Obama said, in a reference to the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, John McCain, who has endorsed President Bush's policy in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Nice. His full speech can be read here.

For those wondering about the level of support for the Iraq war in a state with huge military bases (including Fort Bragg, Camp Lejeune, and Seymour Johnson Air Force Base), public opinion here as followed the national polls with over 60% support for bringing the troops home. 

Obama should get a bump in polling after visiting the state today - he's likely to be on the frontpage of most of the major newspapers and headlining tonight's news coverage too. So far it's been very positive.   

One of my first blog posts at TPM was about Obama's October 2002 speech in which he came out against the invasion (which I noted at the time came in the same week that Hillary Clinton voted to authorize Bush to attack Iraq). If you have not yet read Obama's speech from 2002, I recommend you do on this 5th anniversary of the invasion.  


If you enjoyed this post please click on the 'recommend this' link and share with other readers.

The campaigns are coming to North Carolina soon and I'm hoping to give TPM readers some flavor of what's happening down here prior to our May 6th primary. We also have a hotly contested race for the Democratic nomination for Governor, pitting two very moderate Democrats against each other: the Lt. Governor Bev Perdue (who leads in polling) and the State Treasurer Richard Moore.

While these two are not superdelegates, here is a strong sign of the belief that Obama will win North Carolina on May 6th:

The Democratic candidates for governor are scrambling to get close to Barack Obama.

Lt. Gov. Beverly Perdue's campaign put out the word late Wednesday that she has endorsed Obama in the Democratic race for president.

Mac McCorkle, an adviser to Perdue's campaign, said she decided to endorse now that North Carolina has become a battleground state.

"She thinks both candidates are exceptionally well-qualified but will be voting for Obama," he said.

Meanwhile, state Treasurer Richard Moore said Thursday that he had lunch with Obama and his wife, Michelle, on July 28, 2004 -- the day after Obama gave the keynote address at the Democratic National Convention that gave rise to his national political career.

"That is something I will never forget," Moore told reporters. "They were both on cloud nine."

Moore had earlier announced his endorsement of Obama.

What's been interesting of late is that each campaign has been mirroring the other. A month ago Moore came out against a hotly contested coal fired power plant that's been proposed in North Carolina and just hours later Perdue did the same.  Moore was first to endorse Obama and within 24-48 hours Perdue had endorsed Obama as well.

These are two very moderate white Democrats but like in other red states, it's obvious that Obama will have long coat-tails here. Democrats have been able to control both chambers of the legislature and the Governor's mansion for years and years, but the margin in the state House is razor thin. Many state Democrats are talking about the down ticket effect if Clinton is the nominee and the possibility of the GOP taking over one chamber at least. 
 
A couple of other things to watch for before the May 6th primary:
- will John Edwards feel renewed pressue to issue an endorsement since the campaigns will be coming to his home state? I imagine so.
- Rep. Mel Watt had been an Edwards supporter and recently said that he will make an endorsement before the primary. Expect Obama to pick up this superdelegate and respected leader of the Legislative Black Caucus. 
- I don't know about other SD endorsements except most of those who haven't yet endorsed are people who don't like to ever rock the boat and who don't like to do anything controversial, so I'd expect them to just stay out of the endorsement game at least through May. 

I'm happy to answer any questions people have about North Carolina - just post in the comments section.


If you enjoyed this post, please share with other readers by clinking on the 'recommend this' link.
  

Scenario 1: Hillary wins Pennsylvania's popular vote.  Obama and Hillary trade victories in the remaining states primaries as is generally expected. FL and MI do not re-vote and their delegates do not count. Delegate total remains virtually unchanged. Based on leads in popular votes and pledged delegates the SD's back Obama in such overwhelming numbers that Clinton concedes. Clinton supporters feel super-delegates should have backed her but accept her concession in which she strongly endorses Obama.  (probability 40%) 

Scenario 2: Obama wins Pennsylvania's popular vote. Hillary concedes shortly thereafter. Little controversy here. Clinton supporters would likely accept the defeat since there would be little doubt that Obama had fairly won the nomination fairly, defeating Clinton in the last big state. Super-delegate role is insignificant.  (20% probability)

Scenario 3:  Hillary wins Pennsylvania and wins surprisingly in most of the remaining states. She gets the momentum back completely and has blowout victories in KY, WV, and PR while pulling off surprising narrow victories in IN, NC, and OR.  She pulls within 30 pledged delegates and the super-delegates back her in a landslide giving her the nomination. Obama only concedes just before the convention when it is clear the super-delegates will not change their mind. Obama strongly asks his supporters to back Clinton and most of them do. (probability 5%) 

Scenario 4: Hillary wins PA. Her campaign either sues the DNC for stripping FL and MI of their delegates or is able to win the issue in the credentials committee. Either through court order or the credentials committee, the FL and MI delegates are seated according to the primary results. Super-delegates side with Clinton in greater numbers and she wins the nomination at the convention. Obama supporters largely refuse to back Clinton.(probability 3%)  

Scenario 5:  Hillary wins PA and wins big in re-votes in MI and FL.  She also wins surprisingly in most of the remaining states. Obama is hit with some new damning controversy and bows out of the race after many of the remaining Super-delegates endorse Hillary. Obama supporters accept the Clinton nomination but with lots of ill feelings. (probability 1%)

Scenario 6:  Obama and Hillary have a near tie in the delegate count. Obama and Hillary supporters engage in outright military combat from state to state and the second American civil war begins. (probability .0001%)

Scenario 7: Obama and Hillary have a near tie in the delegate count. Howard Dean brokers a deal in which Mike Gravel is the Democratic candidate for President and Obama-Clinton will share the vice-Presidency. The Democratic Party is saved and the Gravel Presidency brings about huge job gains from rock quarries and the new national sport, rock skipping. (probability 98%)   Other scenarios on how the nomination is decided?  

If you enjoyed this post, please share with other readers by clinking on the 'recommend this' link.