Senator Hillary Clinton, in this NWN video with Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez
and many legislators at her post-speech presser, is lining up California’s Democratic
establishment, usually a questionable strategy in the Presidential primary.
On a big weekend for California Democrats, two presidential candidates dominated, one more than another, a couple others shined, and a record crowd of delegates, guests, and media types found the inside of a cavernous concrete convention center to be more sparkling than the San Diego harbor resort attractions within easy walking distance just outside.
Despite being obviously under the weather with an audibly sore throat, frontrunning Senator Hillary Clinton gave the best speech Saturday morning I’ve ever heard from her. She talked about her background, her mother’s humble beginnings, how she herself became engaged with public service, how she pledged to end the war in Iraq, a moving story about an uninsured man who died from an abscessed tooth after $300,000 was spent in a fruitless effort to save him, and so on.
She got a good response, with only a few scattered catcalls for her past support of the Iraq War. That good response was swallowed up by the overwhelming response won later in the day the rival close on her heels in the latest Wall Street Journal national poll, Senator Barack Obama.
Clinton is an extraordinarily formidable politician, deeply experienced, skilled, with a powerful machine. Obama is a sensation, a superstar, an extraordinary talent, hitting a strong popular chord that resonates on both the left and the center.
Still, while Obama had the biggest response, as well as the biggest volunteer operation, and I’ll focus on Obama in the next column, Clinton is doing all she can to build the strongest possible conventional campaign. She stuck around for several hours after her speech, meeting with key Democratic interest groups and politicians. Her campaign may soon name as state director Ace Smith, a very experienced operative who recently played top roles in the campaigns of LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and Attorney General Jerry Brown. (Brown, the former governor and two-time Democratic presidential runner-up, gave a powerful speech to the convention while Villaraigosa played a much more low-key role, appearing only at an emotional Saturday night banquet honoring House Speaker Nancy Pelosi which was all but ignored by the press.)
While Obama was accompanied in his convention sojourns, which were extensive, by former state Controller and eBay honcho Steve Westly, San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris, and state Senate Majority Leader Gloria Romero of LA, Clinton was attended by a phalanx of politicians, led by Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez.
“We have the biggest endorsers, a lot bigger than Obama’s,” said one of the state’s top Democratic strategists, now supporting Clinton. Former Governor Gray Davis and state Treasurer Bill Lockyer endorsed Clinton — no surprise, since they gave maxed out personal contributions during her big fundraisers last month — along with a host of other prominent names.
Speaker Nunez brought along 15 other state assemblymembers to endorse the former first lady at her post-speech press conference. State Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata — whose name Clinton mispronounced as “Peretta” — is expected to endorse the New York senator soon.
But the track record of California’s Democratic political establishment in presidential primaries is not promising. Especially in time of controversial war. Just ask the backers of Edmund Muskie and Hubert Humphrey. And Obama, who raised more money in a quarter than any presidential candidate in American political history, much of it from some of the sharpest players in technology, finance, and entertainment, is anything but a fringe figure.
Obama didn’t do a press conference, choosing instead to communicate with the voters through the footage and reports of his powerful appearance. Clinton, along with the others, did appear at a press conference with Nunez and the posse of legislators seen in the NWN video above.
She took about a half-dozen questions, two of them from Democratic bloggers which she easily slipped with boilerplate. Her responses were skilled and polished, and could have been delivered most anywhere in the country.
While the huge press contingent, much bigger than at any other press conference, was happy to have seen her up a little closer, not much light was shed. Incidentally, some of her key California supporters were noting the challenge of working with Clinton’s Secret Service detail. They have many requirements, which I know from personal experience, but they also come in very handy.
The Secret Service held the press in the press conference room after Clinton departed. As a security precaution. This also prevented the press from knowing that she wasn’t actually leaving the convention center, or, of course, from following her to the private meetings I mentioned above.
In the face of these two juggernauts, the other candidates struggled. Former Senator Mike Gravel was a curiosity at state Democratic chairman Art Torres’ welcome reception Friday night, which I did not attend. (I’ve learned at a couple dozen of these conventions that generally nothing happens on Friday of any interest to those not directly participating themselves.) Gravel did reportedly say at a press conference that the budget gap could be partially filled by going after “ladies of the night” who don’t pay their taxes and that the government should stop spending like “drunken Indians.” Moving right along.
With most of the press disappearing after Obama’s speech, Senator Chris Dodd and Congressman Dennis Kucinich struggled for attention on Saturday afternoon. I saw Dodd, a powerful committee chairman in the Senate, hanging out on a veranda after a very lightly-attended press conference. Meanwhile, Obama was on his way to LA for a big Hollywood fundraiser.
The candidates appearing Sunday, former Senator John Edwards and New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, fared substantially better. But they suffered from a big drop-off in the crowd and among the press.
Edwards gave an outstanding address, which easily ranked with those of Obama, Clinton, and Brown as among the best of the convention. A very polished and passionate figure, Edwards would be leading were he not in a field packed with such firepower at the top. Initially a more centrist Democrat, Edwards clearly pitched himself as the candidate of labor in his address, as well as a passionate opponent of the Iraq War he once supported.
For his part, Richardson, perhaps the most qualified of the field, is still searching for an opening into the top tier. Richardson’s solution on Sunday was to go long, telling a lot about his background and his plans on education, health care, energy, the environment, immigration, taxes, and foreign policy, in frequently amusing fashion. He did this both in his speech and in a lengthy press conference, which top aides several times tried to get him to halt so he could make his flight to San Francisco, where he appeared at an afternoon rally on Darfur before continuing to Carson City, Nevada for the beginning of a tour of that second-in-the-nation contest state where he hopes to break through.
In all, a very interesting weekend, and I’ll have more items, columns, and videos today and the next few days.
Digg This
del.icio.us
PJM Home
50 Comments
1. Jonas Blane:It sounds like a great convention!
Apr 30, 2007 - 6:05 am 2. Sacramento Solon:Bill,
Good stuff. Thanks for all your hard work this weekend so we could be informed.
Apr 30, 2007 - 6:34 am 3. Donkey Delegate:Bill–
Once again you gave they type of insightful analysis we have come to expect. While the press noted the crowd reaction to Obama, I think you went deeper with your perceptions and hit the nail on the head as to the speeches.
Obama did have stirring rhetoric, with riffs from Abraham Lincoln. The thematic presentation really was a pleasure to listen to, and if you want to hire a graduation speaker to inspire your students toward a hopeful future, this is your guy.
But, Clinton gave the home run stump speech, that not only as you said could be said anywhere in the country, but would also be quite effective in the GENERAL ELECTION. It wasn’t intended to just satisfy the Democratic activists, but make an appeal to the whole country.
And, while Obama’s speech was unquestionably superior in emotional appeal, as you noted Clinton surprised me with also doing well in that arena, and creating a logical and deeply structured case for how she would govern as President.
So, as one of the delegates coming to the convention with an open mind, I was taken aback with how well Clinton’s speech resonated and how well it painted a picture of what a second Clinton presidency would look like.
Now, having said all that, I am a party hack. The question I have is whether supporting Clinton is similar to your parallel of Muskie and Humphrey. Will supporting Clinton be analogous to supporting Symington or Stevenson in the 1960 primary, only to watch the young, inexperienced U.S. Senator capture the imagination of the electorate?
Clinton fans, feel free to quote Lloyd Bentsen’s famous debate line here, but I do think that is a legitimate question at this stage given all the Obamamania.
There were also distinctions among the candidates as to their relative stands on withdrawing from Iraq. Some gave absolutes, some with specific deadlines, and some spoke in more measured terms. It was interesting being in the hall to hear those sometimes subtle differences.
The only other surprise to me this weekend was the very limited posturing by hopefuls for the next round of statewide constitional offices. I just assumed they would have begun jostling in earnest for 2010, but there was little of that as the Democrats were firmly focused on regaining the White House.
Oh, and Bill, right after watching your favorite show “24″ tonight. Don’t forget to record (or watch online) the competing show “Heroes.” There is an upcoming election that is very important to the plotline, and a young mutant with the power to manipulate machines such as ATMs. Let’s just say that Karl Rove would love to let this guy loose on his favorite Diebold machines…
Apr 30, 2007 - 7:32 am 4. Ann:Bill, it sounds like you think Obama is the winner.
Apr 30, 2007 - 7:41 am 5. Bill Bradley:Thanks, Solon. It was a very busy weekend. In the past, I would take a day off after a convention. Oh, well.
Apr 30, 2007 - 7:51 am 6. Bill Bradley:Thanks, Donkey Delegate. I think.
Incidentally, I do like “Heroes.” I wonder if Nathan Petrelli will win that election in New York …
Apr 30, 2007 - 7:52 am 7. Jake:Hillary’s got horrible negatives. She’s a Democrat Newt.
Apr 30, 2007 - 8:08 am 8. Capitol Boy:Hillary is such a pol. You can see the wheels turning behind her eyes when she talks.
Apr 30, 2007 - 8:29 am 9. Jonas Blane:Clinton comes off intelligent and poised.
Apr 30, 2007 - 8:40 am 10. Ann:Why is La Times political blog saying Hillary was booed? Did you miss that, Bill?
Apr 30, 2007 - 8:47 am 11. Wilbur:Very nice, Bill.
Anybody have a link handy to the Clinton and Obama speeches?
Did Biden take a pass?
Apr 30, 2007 - 8:48 am 12. Bill Bradley:I’ll check on that LA Times blog report. There were fewer Timesies than usual there and Bob Salladay wasn’t one of them.
No, there was no booing of Hillary. A few scattered, very occasional catcalls about cutting funding to Iraq. Barely noticeable.
Apr 30, 2007 - 8:50 am 13. Bill Bradley:Thanks, Wilbur.
Obama had speech text on hand.
Clinton did not.
You might look at Obama’s site for the text. I’ll have video of his speech later.
Biden decided not to come, as I reported last week.
Apr 30, 2007 - 8:52 am 14. Barbara:I am voting for Obama.
Apr 30, 2007 - 8:52 am 15. Ann:La Times must be cutting back more. I can think of another way to cut the budget there. lol
Apr 30, 2007 - 8:59 am 16. Jonathan Hemlock:I am looking forward to seeing the material on Mr. Obama. Ms. Clinton is skilled, as you say, and impressive. But she seems very programmed.
Apr 30, 2007 - 9:09 am 17. richard locicero:I only caught snippits of Clinton and Obama but I did heat the Edwards Speech on the San Diego “Air America” Station (we can get here in darkest OC) and though it was very goo. Maybe ‘m niased since Edwards is my choice (as long as Gore stays out) but I like the fact that he’s substantive and willing to explain how he’ll fund all those goodies. I know that what a candidate proposes is only a starting point but when you have some concrete ideas it seems better than Obama’s “Trust Me”.
You know I feel sorry for Kuchinich. Here he’s been the true believer’s “AntiWar” Candidate and the favorite of lefties everywhere (the Pacifica/Amy Goodman crowd) and now along comes Mike Gravel and he steals them away. At Least that’s the impression I get from listening to comments on the radio and other sources. Poor Dennis is being left for the new kid in town! The new pretty face! Somehow it just doesn’t seem fair!
Apr 30, 2007 - 9:15 am 18. Bill Bradley:And don’t forget Gravel’s great moment in the SC debate, when he said he was frightened by some of the other candidates.
Apr 30, 2007 - 9:18 am 19. Ann:He wants to balance the budget by taxing prostitution. What a hoot!
Apr 30, 2007 - 9:29 am 20. Jack Aubrey:Clinton simply isn’t very appealing.
Apr 30, 2007 - 9:46 am 21. Jonas Blane:I think she’s impressive.
Apr 30, 2007 - 9:58 am 22. Wilbur:Beyond the activist core, do Dem primary voters consider the legislative leadership “leaders”?
As a voter Jerry Brown’s endorsement would mean something to me, because I think he’s a consummate pro from whom I’d take tips on who can win the “horse race,” but I instinctively suspect legislators of primarily snuggling up to dance partners to enhance their own futures.
Apr 30, 2007 - 10:01 am 23. Bill Bradley:We’ll see with regard toi legislative endorsements.
Incidentally, I’ve talked with Jerry Brown about the race, off the record.
Apr 30, 2007 - 10:21 am 24. Sacramento Solon:And did you extend my best wishes to our former governor?
Apr 30, 2007 - 10:32 am 25. Bill Bradley:I don’t recall receiving those.
Apr 30, 2007 - 10:34 am 26. Kandy Kid:At the risk of incurring Bill’s wrath again, I am going to post this opening paragraph and link to a story about Hillary Clinton. The book referenced is written by a decidedly non-right wing conspirator Carl Bernstein.
“Drawing on a trove of private papers from Hillary Clinton’s best friend, the legendary Watergate journalist Carl Bernstein is to publish a hard-hitting and intimate portrait of the 2008 presidential candidate, which will reveal a number of “discrepancies” in her official story.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article1719879.ece
She is still my favorite candidate in the Democratic primary.
Apr 30, 2007 - 10:36 am 27. Sacramento Solon:I believe there were part of your traveling papers given late last week. What can I say, once again…
Apr 30, 2007 - 10:42 am 28. Bill Bradley:Gravel sounds like a hoot!
It looks like Bob Salladay, who was not at the convention — I only noticed two LA Times reporters, the fewest I’ve ever seen — was blogging, a lot actually, by linking to left-wing netroots sites, primarily that one run by a small group that I had to ban from NWN last year.
For balance, I suppose, he linked to an item from The Hill by Karen Hanretty.
But Karen is in Washington now and her item was based on an erroneous report in the Washington Times. The Moonie-owned publication was distorting the truth to make Clinton look bad.
So the Times blog was relying on far left wing and far right wing sources for those reports. The commonality, of course, is hyperpartisanship.
Apr 30, 2007 - 10:49 am 29. Bill Bradley:… Incidentally, I’ve contacted Karen and she’s corrected her blog.
Apr 30, 2007 - 10:50 am 30. carole w:Bill,
THANK YOU for the video of Clinton. Obviously, I like her. Your video made me feel like I was at the convention.
KK,
The comments regarding Carl’s book,only strengthen my belief that I have picked the correct candidate to vote for.
Senator Bradley was on The View this morning. What a great guy! I wish he was involved in the 2008 primaries? Come to think of it Bradley would be a fine choice for Vice President:)
Apr 30, 2007 - 11:10 am 31. Capitol Boy:Blogging relying on a bunch of zanies as his sources. Man, Otis Chandler must be rolling around in his grave.
Apr 30, 2007 - 11:13 am 32. Bill Bradley:Unless you are planning to take 80 across the Bay Bridge to Oakland for an excursion in the East Bay or a trip to the capital.
101 bears to the left as you get into San Francisco and goes across the Golden Gate Bridge.
80 bears to the right and goes across the Bay Bridge.
Apr 30, 2007 - 11:26 am 33. carole w:Thank You:)
Apr 30, 2007 - 11:29 am 34. Bill Bradley:Political analysis and trip planning.
Apr 30, 2007 - 11:38 am 35. carole w:Can you cook too?
Apr 30, 2007 - 12:12 pm 36. Bill Bradley:I’m like the proverbial supermodel. I make reservations for dinner.
Apr 30, 2007 - 12:17 pm 37. Paul Burton:RE: ‘And don’t forget Gravel’s great moment in the SC debate, when he said he was frightened by some of the other candidates. :)’
Gravel said the ‘frontrunners’ scared him because they would leave ‘all options’ on the table re: Iran, and he reads that as code for using nukes. When Gravel indicated he was talking about the big four leading candidates, Biden raised his hand to be included among them, and Gravel replied, “yes, Joe you have a certain arrogance …” So true! Biden and Dodd know they’ll never be elected president yet waste our time with their meaningless drivel. We need more candidates who will express anger and disgust at the war mongers posing as peace candidates and who will point out that ‘the military industrial complex is controlling our government and controlling our culture,” as Gravel did.
Now, if the quotes from the convention press conference you mention are accurate, then Gravel has taken his passionate unfiltered style and gone too far, beyond being a crank, and beyond politically incorrect, into racist stereotyping.
I suppose we’ll need an independent to crash the debates and speak the truth once Clinton-Obama are coronated.
Apr 30, 2007 - 12:21 pm 38. Ann:You’re just so suuuure you are right, Paul. It’s cute. lol
Apr 30, 2007 - 1:00 pm 39. Capitol Boy:I wonder how many of those assemblymen/women make an impression on even their own constituents’ pick for President.
Apr 30, 2007 - 4:23 pm 40. Ann:They’re there so short a time how could they make an impression?
Apr 30, 2007 - 4:36 pm 41. richard locicero:The Washington TIMES distorted the truth? What a surprise!
Apr 30, 2007 - 4:51 pm 42. Bill Bradley:Astonishing, I know. To her credit, Karen Hanretty corrected her blog when I called it to her attention. She was simply relying on a report that, among other things, was showcased by the Flash Report. She didn’t knock Hillary, likening the situation to when Feinstein was booed at a convention for supporting the death penalty. With TV camera crew on hand to use the footage for a commercial!
Apr 30, 2007 - 5:34 pm 43. Jonas Blane:Why is that Moonie rag still around? It can’t have enough readers to make any difference.
Apr 30, 2007 - 6:05 pm 44. Capitol Boy:Isn’t the Reverend Sun Myung Moong dead?
Apr 30, 2007 - 6:14 pm 45. Sacramento Solon:Wilbur…
Obama’s speech is available on his website:
http://www.barackobama.com/
I can’t find anything on Clinton.
Apr 30, 2007 - 6:18 pm 46. Bill Bradley:No, he isn’t. Rev. Moon is in his late 80s.
>Capitol Boy :
Apr 30, 2007 - 6:56 pm 47. Jonathan Hemlock:Isn’t the Reverend Sun Myung Moong dead?
Apr 30, 2007 06:14 PM
I thought he was dead, too. Does the Unification Church still control the Washington Times?
Apr 30, 2007 - 7:22 pm 48. Bill Bradley:I believe it does.
Apr 30, 2007 - 7:59 pm 49. Jonas Blane:Were the Moonies the ones chanting with the flowers at the airports?
May 1, 2007 - 5:45 am 50. Bill Bradley:No. That religious cult was the Hare Krishnas.
The Moonies sent out attractive girls to recruit guys — and girls — on college campuses to “come to dinner.”
May 1, 2007 - 7:02 am