<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>@kajleers &#187; presidency</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.kajleers.nl/index.php/tag/presidency/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.kajleers.nl</link>
	<description>Politiek/Politics, Meningen/Views, Nieuws/News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Dec 2011 15:52:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>As expected, Hillary talks down Iowa&#8217;s importance</title>
		<link>http://www.kajleers.nl/index.php/2007/12/hillary-talks-down-iowas-importance-as-expected/</link>
		<comments>http://www.kajleers.nl/index.php/2007/12/hillary-talks-down-iowas-importance-as-expected/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Dec 2007 18:30:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kaj</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Analyses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voorpagina]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[caucus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democratic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Edwards]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iowa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Hampshire]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[presidency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[primary]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kajleers.nl/?p=101</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As predicted (read here), Team Clinton has started talking down the importance of Iowa. On ABC with George Stephanopoulous, Clinton said that she never really expected to surpass Barack Obama and John Edwards, who had double-digit leads over her in the local polls for the Democratic caucuses, to be held there on January 3. On [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p>   <p><a href="http://www.kajleers.nl/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/hillary.jpg"><img src="http://www.kajleers.nl/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/hillary.thumbnail.jpg" border="5" hspace="2" vspace="2" /></a><strong>A</strong>s predicted (read<a href="http://www.kajleers.nl/?p=98" target="_blank"> here</a>), Team Clinton has started talking down the importance of Iowa. On ABC with George Stephanopoulous, Clinton said that she <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/TheNote/story?id=3105288&amp;page=1" target="_blank">never really expected</a> to surpass Barack Obama and John Edwards, who had double-digit leads over her in the local polls for the Democratic caucuses, to be held there on January 3.  On Iowa, Clinton now says &#8220;I&#8217;m not expecting anything.&#8221;</p>
<p><span id="more-101"></span><br />
<strong>T</strong>ruth be told, though: the rationale to talk down expectations seems a little different from my earlier prediction. That rationale centered on Clinton throwing all her weight into the New Hampshire fight &#8212; a state that is very much in Clinton&#8217;s strategy &#8212; but with some polls now carefully showing Edwards gaining on Obama while other polls put Clinton ahead of the pack, the rationale is more likely based on a two-pronged offensive, instead of simply talking down Iowa and winning big in New Hampshire instead, after sapping Obama&#8217;s and Edwards&#8217; strength as the two men go head-to-head in Iowa in the last days before the Iowa caucus.</p>
<p>The first is that Clinton, in the last days before the caucus, is seeking the underdog-mantle. It is always handy to bring down expectations, especially when you have the idea that you may actually win; it gives great momentum in terms of press coverage if you&#8217;re considered the loser, but manage to end first in the marathon.</p>
<p>The second is that Team Clinton is obviously hoping that, by sort of stepping out of the dogfight arena, the two pitbull terriers Obama and Edwards will go at each other with a vengeance. Edwards has been gaining in several polls and was even placed ahead of Clinton and Obama in <a href="http://www.thestate.com/local/story/270299.html" target="_blank">this one</a>. That will reinvigorate an Edwards who knows that it&#8217;s &#8220;Iowa or bust&#8221; for his campaign. With the Clinton-Obama competition of the past weeks, Obama knows he can&#8217;t lose Iowa either (it&#8217;s gotta be either first or second place), and so he&#8217;ll be trying to tear Edwards apart. The past 48 hours or so already saw Obama retuning his stump speech to include some of the anger Edwards has been throwing at his audience.</p>
<p>This would leave room for Clinton to basically resume her &#8216;above the fray&#8217;-stance which she had up until about a month ago, when she started slipping versus Obama. Or so Clinton hopes. One thing&#8217;s for sure, though: the campaign would <em>never</em> take such a risk (because it is certainly that) if it didn&#8217;t think it was sensible. Perhaps the vote for the caucus-goers&#8217; second choice is what Team Clinton is after.</p>
<p>Another interesting tidbit: according to an overview of these <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/ia/iowa_democratic_caucus-208.html" target="_blank">polls</a>, Obama&#8217;s momentum seems to have faded. For almost a month Obama was riding high and with each step Team Clinton undertook to bruise him, he seemed to only gain. He had the usual Momentum, which ordinarily lasts for a maximum of three weeks, sometimes four if the direct opponent makes big mistakes. Those days are in the past now and Edwards seems more determined than ever to at least get second place. And he won&#8217;t be doing that without drawing blood, so Obama had better prepare.</p>
<p>Another certainty is after January 3, the endorsements game will begin, and it could very well be that Clinton will be the one to go into the New Hampshire arena with most endorsements.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.kajleers.nl/index.php/2007/12/hillary-talks-down-iowas-importance-as-expected/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Forget Iowa: It&#8217;s New Hampshire, Stupid!</title>
		<link>http://www.kajleers.nl/index.php/2007/12/forget-iowa-for-clinton-losing-new-hampshire-is-not-an-option/</link>
		<comments>http://www.kajleers.nl/index.php/2007/12/forget-iowa-for-clinton-losing-new-hampshire-is-not-an-option/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Dec 2007 10:21:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kaj</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Analyses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voorpagina]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2008]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Edwards]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hillary Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iowa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Edwards]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Hampshire]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[presidency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[white house]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kajleers.nl/?p=98</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Memo to pundits, political junkies and reporters: with less than three weeks to go to the Iowa caucuses, expect the Clinton campaign to start downtalking the importance of Iowa while beefing up New Hampshire. The reasoning: the Clintons were never that strong in Iowa, but New Hampshire has always been the &#8216;litmus state&#8217; for any [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p>   <p><strong>M</strong>emo to pundits, political junkies and reporters: with less than three weeks to go to the Iowa caucuses, expect the Clinton campaign to start downtalking the importance of Iowa while beefing up New Hampshire. The reasoning: the Clintons were never that strong in Iowa, but New Hampshire has always been the &#8216;litmus state&#8217; for any Clinton campaign since 1992. And contrary to Iowa, losing that state in the primary is<em> not</em> an option.</p>
<p><span id="more-98"></span></p>
<p><strong>S</strong>o forget Iowa, the Clintons are going after New Hampshire. Bill Clinton in the past few days has within the campaign thumped on the importance of New Hampshire for everything Clinton ever since his second-place ending in the state in the 1992 Democratic nomination campaign. That pivotal feat revived his campaign and kick-started his succesful run for the presidency.</p>
<p>As Alex MacGill of the Washington Post pointed out in this <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/15/AR2007121501915.html" target="_blank">excellent report</a>, the Clintons have cultivated their ties to the state ever since, so much so that New Hampshire is seen as almost synonymous to Clinton&#8217;s destiny and political standing among pundits, commentators and &#8212; yes &#8212; national media journalists. Because of the state&#8217;s importance and the significance the Clintons themselves always attributed to it, losing that state in the primary would make Hillary Clinton&#8217;s star fade faster than you can say &#8220;implosion&#8221;.</p>
<p>And so the game that is being played for New Hampshire is one of expectations. Since Bill Clinton&#8217;s succesful run for the presidency, New Hampshire has always been high up the political expectations ladder, whilst Iowa &#8212; where he never campaigned &#8212; was mostly off the pundits&#8217; radar screen when it came to the political fortunes of the Clintons.</p>
<p>In 1992, Iowa senator Tom Harkin had such a strong local following for his nomination campaign that Clinton was smart enough to not even bother trying to get caucus votes there, and in 1996 he didn&#8217;t need Iowa. But unfortunately for Bill Clinton, whose reputation is pretty much on the line now that his wife is campaigning for the presidency, the Hillary campaign has put considerable importance on Iowa, so much so that expectations are running high.</p>
<p>And if there is one thing Bill Clinton dislikes, for all his political mastery, it is uncertainty, and Iowa has become a huge question mark. The campaign has realised that all the extra efforts in Iowa of late have been too little, and definitely too late. Hillary Clinton has simply been unable to stem the Obama tide in the unpredictable midwestern state. And even though Hillary&#8217;s team pounces on each individual Iowa poll that shows Hillary one or two percent ahead of Obama, the campaign knows full well that the majority of polls are showing the <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/ia/iowa_democratic_caucus-208.html" target="_blank">reverse picture</a>.</p>
<p>And so the new strategy will be as follows. Bill Clinton is still probably the single, most popular politician in New Hampshire. Thus, the coming weeks shall see Bill and Hillary &#8212; but especially Bill &#8212; tour New Hampshire while ensuring as much local media coverage as possible. Hillary will be projected as a Clinton once again bringing the message of &#8216;change&#8217;, much like her husband succesfully did in 1992. Realising the mistake made in Iowa, where there was a big disconnect between Hillary and Iowans, the campaign will get down to the good old nitty-gritty of traditional campaigning, including having her go door-to-door, which she has <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-dems16dec16,1,5373117.story?track=crosspromo&amp;coll=la-headlines-nation&amp;ctrack=1&amp;cset=true" target="_blank">already started doing</a>.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, the campaign will start what the Russians would call a &#8216;maskirovska&#8217;-campaign, or masking; having everybody believe that they&#8217;re still going full-steam for a win in Iowa, while in reality they aren&#8217;t. The goal is no longer to win in Iowa but to force Obama to concentrate most of his resources there while the secondary goal is to try to come in second, above Edwards. Look for Bill Clinton and other surrogates to start talking down the importance of Iowa in the last week or so before the caucus there takes place, while at the same time becoming New Hampshire cheerleaders.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.kajleers.nl/index.php/2007/12/forget-iowa-for-clinton-losing-new-hampshire-is-not-an-option/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

