Democratic Primary Hits Its Trench Warfare Stage
The Democratic primary is firmly in its trench warfare stage.
On Sunday, both the Clinton and Obama campaigns hosted conference calls in which each camp's aides played political victim, manufactured outrage, and likely didn't change the electoral landscape one bit.
The Obama folks teed off first, casting Clinton as a secretive pol driven by nothing more than political opportunism.
"You get the sense they are literally willing to do anything to win this nomination," argued David Axelrod, Obama's chief spokesman, "whether it is bending the rules or trying to overturn the will of democratic voters."
An hour later, Clinton aides struck back with attack lines of their own, accusing Obama of going viciously negative out of sheer desperation.
"The path that they've chosen is quite clear," said Howard Wolfson, Clinton's press secretary. "The Obama campaign is going to attack Sen. Clinton, they are going to engage in a full assault, they are going to engage in Republican talking points to pursue it... Rather than choosing to build Sen. Obama up, they have chosen to tear Sen. Clinton down."
The griping comes a week after surrogates of the two campaigns found themselves in political hot water for remarks that were deemed either racially offensive (Geraldine Ferraro) or personally vitriolic (Samantha Power). The two candidates, it was reported, met on the Senate floor late last week and promised each other that they would get their surrogates under better control. But the détente, clearly, did not last long.
On the conference call, Axelrod and Obama's communications director Robert Gibbs went through a litany of issues in which they believed Sen. Clinton had been less than fully transparent. They included: Clinton's tax returns, which since 2000 have not been made public; Clinton's earmark requests; the donors to her husband's presidential library and foundation; and records from the White House years.
"To raise these questions is not, as Howard Wolfson says, Ken Starr politics," said Axelrod. "If there is nothing to be concerned about, if there are no issues of concern, then it is in the interest of the Clinton campaign to be forthcoming. We will leave it to them to explain why they have not been."
Asked about this on the day's other call, Wolfson turned the attack on its head, arguing that it was Obama, not Clinton, who was hiding material from public record.
"If we want to talk about disclosure, let's talk about the information that has not been forthcoming from the land deal for Tony Rezko," said Wolfson. "So this works both ways. If we are going to talk about disclosure, let's talk about it. Let's talk about earmarks from the state Senate, let's have state Senate records, let's talk about his schedule from the state Senate."
And on and on it went.
Other topics came up as well. But like the fight over who is more transparent, the battle lines remained the same. Axelrod, for example, reiterated that it would be "disruptive to the party" if superdelegates were to overturn the pledged delegate tally. Mark Penn, Clinton's chief strategist, meanwhile, restated that Obama had not passed the commander-in-chief or steward of the economy tests.
Then, however, there was a fleeting hint of possible amity. Asked whether, after badgering Obama's national security credentials for weeks, Wolfson would logically support Sen. McCain for president if Clinton did not make it through the primary, the spokesperson shot back:
"We certainly cannot support in any way someone who wants to be in Iraq for 100 years, and I don't think America could support someone who wants to be in Iraq for 100 years... Nobody should be under any misconception. If Sen. Obama is, for any reason, the nominee, he would receive the support of a united Democratic Party."
Loading comments…
First Posted: 03-16-08 03:34 PM | Updated: 03-28-08 05:12 AM