Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton during an Associated Press interview in Dubuque, Iowa, Monday, Nov. 12, 2007. (AP Photo/Mark Hirsch)
by Mark Silva
Sen. Hillary Clinton has been accused of playing "the gender card'' in her campaign for president -- complaining of all the boys in the race "piling on'' at their last debate. But tonight, her campaign suggests, Clinton will play the "leadership card.''
In one of those strategic "memoranda'' designed for public consumption, Clinton chief strategist Mark Penn today calls the leadership card "the most important card in this race.''
Poll after poll shows it's leadership that people see in Clinton, her pollster says.
He cites a number of independent media polls to make his case.
There's another poll, however, the Gallup Poll, which found recently that not only Clinton, but also Democratic rival Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois and Republican front-runner Rudy Giuliani of New York all rate "roughly the same'' on the question of leadership among voters surveyed. The Swamp reported on that poll -- with a refresher available here.
As the candidates prepare for tonight's debate in Las Vegas -- airing on CNN at 8 pm EST -- Penn is effectively preparing for a new round of attacks on the party's front-runenr. "For all the negative personal attacks,'' he writes, "this race comes down to one word – leadership.''
RNC spokesman Danny Diaz has this to say about that: “It is good to see that the Clinton camp can maintain a sense of humor after the worst two weeks of their campaign. Before they start drafting memos on general election strategy, someone ought to write a plan to stop Hillary Clinton’s sinking poll numbers in the early states or figure out where their candidate stands on Social Security, tax reform, and driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants.”
See Penn's very public "memo:''
To: Interested Parties
From: Mark Penn, Chief Strategist
Re: State of Play Going Into the Debate
What is the most important card in this race? The leadership card.
That is the card that we see in poll after poll that analyzes why people are voting for Hillary Clinton.
And so while opponents are strategizing and re-launching their campaigns with aggressive personal attacks on Sen. Clinton, one truth remains – running for president is not a qualification for president.
The voters are looking for someone who has the strength and experience to lead, and little has changed in the last few weeks outside of the massive media coverage of the attacks.
As Senator Clinton has said, change is just a word unless you have the strength and experience to make it happen.
So let’s look at the ratings voters give the three leading candidates on the qualities they look for in a president.
On the questions of who is best able to handle Iraq and Iran, Hillary Clinton is the runaway leader. More than half of Democratic primary voters say Hillary can best handle Iran (52%) and Iraq (50%) – more than twice the number for Barack Obama (23% on Iraq and 22% on Iran) and John Edwards (14% on Iran and 16% on Iraq) (ABC/Washington Post Oct 29-Nov 1).
Senator Clinton also has an overwhelming lead among Democrats on being knowledgeable and experienced enough to handle the presidency (76% for Clinton and 41% for Obama), having the strong leadership qualities needed to be president (72% for Clinton and 55% for Obama), being inspirational and an exciting choice for president (64% for Clinton and 56% for Obama), being a good commander in chief (63% for Clinton and 43% for Obama) and bringing real change to the direction of the country (63% for Clinton and 52% for Obama) (NBC/WSJ Nov 1-5).
Finally, as the polls come in, they show that Obama 2.0 isn't working any better than the previous version. After shifting to a negative attack strategy, Obama remains stalled.
For example, as the candidates prepare to meet in Nevada, a new poll there has Hillary Clinton leading Barack Obama 51 percent to 23 percent with 11% for John Edwards. Clinton leads among Nevada likely caucus-goers on having the best chance of beating the Republican nominee in the general election (Clinton 63%, Obama 15%, Edwards 11%), being the strongest leader (Clinton 54%, Obama 21%, Edwards 14%), most qualified to be commander in chief (Clinton 51%, Obama 20%, Edwards 13%), most likely to bring needed change (Clinton 49%, Obama 28%, Edwards 11%), having taken clear positions on the issues (Clinton 42%, Obama 23%, Edwards 12%), saying what she believes rather than what voters want to hear (Clinton 41%, Obama 23%, Edwards 12%), most likeable (Clinton 40%, Obama 30%, Edwards 20%) and most honest (Clinton 37%, Obama 24%, Edwards 13%).
In the national polls, five polls in the last two weeks show Hillary Clinton’s lead holding steady or increasing in the Democratic primary. The latest NBC/WSJ poll gives Hillary a 22 point lead, up 1 point from September, and yesterday’s Cook Political / RT Strategies poll puts Hillary 17 points ahead – up from a 13 point advantage in September. AP/Ipsos gives Hillary a 23 point lead, up 2 points since October, USA Today/Gallup has her 28 points ahead, compared with 29 points in October and according to Newsweek, Hillary now leads by 19 points, compared with 21 points in August.
Hillary also leads Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney. She leads Giuliani by 3 points in the Cook/RT Strategies poll, 6 points in the USA Today / Gallup poll, 6 points in the CNN poll, 10 points in the WNBC/Marist poll, 4 points in the Newsweek poll and 4 points in the ABC/Washington Post poll. Her advantage widens against other Republicans – to 9 points over McCain, 18 points over Romney and 16 points over Thompson in the ABC/Washington Post poll.
And the states show little change. We know it is a close race in Iowa and Hillary has a significant lead in New Hampshire.
The latest Iowa polls all show a very close race - this week's CBS/NYT poll gives Hillary Clinton a lead of only 2 points. In New Hampshire, Hillary has a double-digit lead (15 points in this week’s CBS/New York Times poll). Hillary leads by 10 points in South Carolina (Winthrop/ETV). And in yesterday’s Quinnipiac Ohio poll, Hillary’s 25 point lead is virtually unchanged from last month.
Meanwhile in the general election, Hillary leads Giuliani in Ohio, Florida, Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, Virginia, West Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee – all states the Democrats lost in 2004. In fact, if the election were held tomorrow, Hillary would win 360 electoral votes compared with 178 electoral votes for Rudy Giuliani. And Hillary would beat Fred Thompson, John McCain and Mitt Romney by similar margins.
But for all the negative personal attacks, this race comes down to one word – leadership.
• 
• 
• 
Comments
I find it hard to believe the people of Iowa don't think Governor Richardson or Senator Biden are better candidates than Clinton, Obama and Edwards. Even Dodd is more qualified than them.
Posted by: Paul | November 15, 2007 3:00 PM
Dumb question: in seven years in the U.S. Senate, what change has Clinton's alleged leadership made happen?
Posted by: Adam B. | November 15, 2007 3:08 PM
Yeah, it's 'leadership' all right. Penn says it comes down to one word, 'leadership'. Okay, Clinton leads on secretism, Clinton leads on evading questions, Clinton leads on crybaby, Clinton leads on planting questions, Clinton leads on being a non-leader. Leadership -- the kind of leadership we don't want, the kind of leadership we don't need! The only reason Clinton's poll numbers have been where they are since the beginning is because the nation knows the name, it's the name, stupid, it's the name. So if the American people want a nothing leader in the white house just based on name, we deserve what we get -- bad news leadership.
Posted by: RuthieM | November 15, 2007 3:27 PM
All I ever get when I come to this site is a fax from the Clinton "perception machine".
It is called Spin, Spin, Spin, Spin Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,Spin,
Posted by: Irishamerican | November 15, 2007 3:33 PM
A phony leader is still a phony. We already know what Hillary is not and what she is not is a real leader. She has never led anything in her life. Watching her campaign is like watching a Hollywood movie: it's all script and makeup.
Posted by: Shandra | November 15, 2007 3:36 PM
Come on Clinton, you just flip flopped on driver's license to illegal immigrates, What kind of leadership is this? Not every stand you take will be popular, just tell the American people why you have taken that stand and tell them you will listen to them when we disagree, (By the way that is Obama's quote) just frame it another way and make your own. Like Obama said no one has monopoly over wisdom.
Posted by: Jay | November 15, 2007 3:44 PM
Rudy, Rudy, Rudy, save us from the Clintons. She didn't earn her power, she married into it. Save us from socialists who are committed to telling you exactly how to live your life, and how they know better than you about what is good for you. *shudder*
Posted by: Alice Addams | November 15, 2007 3:58 PM
Rudy, Rudy, Rudy, save us from the Clintons.
Posted by: Alice Addams | November 15, 2007 3:58 PM
Save us Rudy?
Yeah, that'll be the day, Rudy couldn't even save his 2nd wife from knowing about his girlfriend (wife #3) during his most recent affair.
http://therealrudy.org/blog/11777-the-real-rudy-mistakes-in-30-seconds?play=1
Posted by: Jimmy Justice | November 15, 2007 4:36 PM
This lemon-ade would be easier to swallow with a little sweetener. People don't like her so her people say its a personal attack everytime a glaring fault is pointed out. Her every weakness is called a strength.
She's a controlling shrew and saying otherwise doesn't make it so.
Posted by: whatnow | November 15, 2007 5:17 PM
Leadership? Who's been leading on the issues? The answer is John Edwards. He's led on health care, environment, labor, economic policy, and nearly every other measure you could possible use to judge these things. There's no question who the leader in this race is. Hillary doesn't give a position until it's been focus-grouped to death or copied directly from another candidate. Obama waits for Edwards to take the lead on a subject (like poverty) and then claim that he was there first.
Posted by: Mike | November 15, 2007 5:28 PM
There isn't one person on the Democratic side of things who can be called or considered a leader. And, Hillary, about the only thing she can lead is a criminal gang.
Posted by: John D | November 15, 2007 5:53 PM
John D,
You can't talk about leaders as you have been nothing more than a follower. Now, go ahead, hit me with your regularly one liner.
Posted by: Leader | November 15, 2007 6:47 PM
In regards to Hillary flipping on allowing licenses for illegals goes, I guess her staff found another larger group of voters that she can deceive to get elected.
The worst thing is the potential number of un-informed females that will vote for her just because she's a woman-scary!.
Posted by: Joe | November 15, 2007 8:16 PM
What I am learning is how remarkably ready national journalists are to call an election for people months ahead. I watched the debate, studied the blogs, saw what came up - and the NYT and the WP and many other mainstream media outlets are all pitching - STILL - Hillary as inevitable. No real journalism about what each candidate said - just the latest opinion about horse-race numbers.
SHAME ON ALL OF YOU - here we are in a moment to make some change - and you journalists and your editors and patrons would rather promote the notion that it is all predictable, all just the same Louis XIV landscape - and we wonder why so many educated Americans don't vote? You must admit your power and you must acknowledge that for the past twenty years you have annointed kings - not reported on and critically engaged presidents. SHAME ON YOU.
Posted by: John Schmor | November 16, 2007 12:13 AM
Oh "Leader," no one liners for you. Me, a follower? No, not really. I would be willing to put my leadership credentials up against your's any day of the week though. More than likely you'd end up looking worse than Barney, Goober, Otis and Floyd.
Posted by: John D | November 16, 2007 9:24 AM
Whole Hillary's campaign is controversial. At first, I thought she is a good candidate but her campaign shows that she can't be taken seriously. I started to change my mind about her when she struggled to give straight answers to simple questions. Next, I get very disappointed when I watched this video http://www.weshow.com/us/p/23714/the_student_who_asked_hillary_a_planted_question which proves that she plants questions during her campaign appearance. Shame on you, Hillary!
Posted by: Roger | November 16, 2007 9:30 AM
Thank you for FOLLOWING my directions. You just couldn't help yourself. This proves exactly what I mean.
"More than likely you'd end up looking worse than Barney, Goober, Otis and Floyd."
Rush would be so proud of you.
Posted by: Leader | November 16, 2007 10:40 AM
I have seen many championship fights in Las Vegas, and most of them are great, but last nights match was a sleeper. Hillary brought her cheer (boo) squad, and when her opponents tried to land an effective punch the boo squad and the referee (Wolf Blitzer) would step in to seperate them. So fans its not worth watching a re-run. Take the family to the circus, because last night was a stinker.
Posted by: Active Duty GI | November 16, 2007 11:02 AM
Republicans are fractured, yet they will all unite if Hillary wins the primary. Hillary has now become our Nader. Instead of sucking away votes from the Dems like Nader, she will push away votes that could have gone to the Dems. Nader voters were egotistical in their cause and did not see the folly in their voting pattern in 2000 and Gore could have won. Now we are going to see Mitt, Rudy, or whoever take office and again we are going to be left wondering why we voted for someone we may personally like, but who adversely offends independents. I will, from here on out, call her Hillary Nader.
Posted by: Paul Lee | November 16, 2007 11:29 AM
Republicans are fractured, yet they will all unite if Hillary wins the primary. Hillary has now become our Nader. Instead of sucking away votes from the Dems like Nader, she will push away votes that could have gone to the Dems. Nader voters were egotistical in their cause and did not see the folly in their voting pattern in 2000 and Gore could have won. Now we are going to see Mitt, Rudy, or whoever take office and again we are going to be left wondering why we voted for someone we may personally like, but who adversely offends independents. I will, from here on out, call her Hillary Nader.
Posted by: Paul Lee | November 16, 2007 11:57 AM