RECENT POSTS
- White House State Dinner Party Crashers
- Obama to Lay Out Emissions Goals in Copenhagen
- Free Bird
- The "Good" War
- The Presidential Planner
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
- White House State Dinner – Who Made the Exclusive Guest List?
- Admiral Mike Mullen To Geneva for START Talks
- VP Biden to Indian Prime Minister: “You’re the Hottest Ticket in Town”
- FLOTUS on the State Dinner: Like a Swan, "Calm and Serene Above Water, But We're Paddling Like Mad, Going Crazy Underneath"
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Audio: Clinton Camp Testing Attacks on Obama
April 25, 2008 10:56 AM
On Wednesday, Obama-backing musician in Black Mountain, North Carolina, David LaMotte, got a phone call from a pollster for Sen. Hillary Clinton, Garin-Hart-Yang, in which negative messages against Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, were being tested.
The Garin in Garin-Hart-Yang, incidentally, is Geoff Garin, who has an op-ed in today's Washington Post complaining that the Obama campaign is the one that's negative, not Clinton.
Ahem.
"I'm going to read you a few criticisms opponents might make about Barack Obama," the pollster said. "For each one please tell me if they give you very major doubts, fairly major doubts, some doubts or no real doubts about supporting Barack Obama for president.
"At a time when we need leaders who are clear, strong and decisive, Obama has been inconsistent, saying he would remove all troops, but then indicating that he might not, and pledging to renegotiate NAFTA, but then sending signals that he would not actually do so as president.
'He supported George W. Bush's 2005 energy bill which paid six billion dollars in subsidies to the oil and gas industry, nine billion dollars in subsidies to the coal industry and twelve billion dollars in subsidies to the nuclear power industry. It was called 'a piñata of perks' and 'the best energy bill corporations could buy.' Would that leave you with major doubts, some doubts or no real doubts?"
You can listen to some of the call, which LaMotte record and emailed to me, HERE.
Says LaMotte, in an email, "the questions, as you'll hear, are unanswerable if you don't accept the basic premises laid out in them, like the classic push poll example 'Are you still beating your wife?' You can't answer that 'yes or no.' I don't accept that Barack pledged to walk away from NAFTA OR that he 'sent signals' that he wouldn't really do it as president, both of which are premises for the question. Like Hillary, he pledged to renegotiate, and to walk away if other parties refused. And having unpaid staff in a misrepresented casual conversation in Chicago over coffee with someone from the Canadian embassy I don't accept as 'sending signals.' So how do I answer this question: 'Would that leave you with major doubts, some doubts or no real doubts about Senator Obama's candidacy?' Well... if it were true, it might leave me with some doubts, but it's not, and that's not an option for an answer."
LaMotte adds that "the really sad part of this is that I was excited to be a part of a poll. Unlike a lot of people that would have considered it a nuisance, I've been following the polls around the country closely, and I was thrilled to have the opportunity to weigh in on one in my own state. It was terribly disappointing to realize that I was just being manipulated. It's hard to see how these could generate any useful data either, given that most Obama supporters would simply hang up offended when the questions got so insulting. That leaves you with data that is skewed pro-Clinton."
Incidentally, LaMotte would be happy to hear from you on his blog.
h/t dailykos.
- jpt
April 25, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (123)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
This is not surprising, it is only unfortunate that it got caught. Both parties have unspecified agendas that clearly go on that resemble these types of tactics frequently. Look back in the election about 20 years ago, I'm sure you all remember what went on and who won. Go figure.
Posted by: Quiz | Apr 26, 2008 1:13:23 AM
Lear - Yes, actions speak louder than words, but in politics, actions can be misinterpreted if critical details are left out...
My point is that Obama is absolutely right about the special interests and their maneuverings in Washington. This bill highlights the struggle that has existed for getting important energy policy changes in place legislatively against the will of these special interest groups. The DEMS shouldn't have had to compromise with the Oil companies to get green issues on the table - the Bush administration should have taken the lead and tabled bills to that effect, but, alas, they were always in the deep pockets of these businesses. Remember that Bush is really an oil exec plant- his sole purpose for being in office is the advance their interests; that's what he did as Texas governor as well. It's also why the Iraq war was fought - to replace the UN's control of Iraqi oil with US oil companies influence and control. Thats the level of control that big business interests have in politics these days. They pick presidents while making you THINK that you do. How else do you explain the fact that Bush got two terms while clearly being incompetent?
Posted by: Mike | Apr 26, 2008 12:50:57 AM
please show me a link to some proof of these bundled donations you speak of. I haven't seen it myself.
And contrary to popular belief, i DO know that Obama isn't perfect. None of them are. Your all should recognize that they each have their good and bad qualities.
I don't believe either of the Senators' healthcare stances are that great because they are efficient. They are still based on insurance companies and drug companies that profit off of our health. If anything shouldn't be based on profit, it's the healthcare system. And McCain's war stance upsets me profoundly. We need the Iraqis to take charge of their own country. We can't fix it FOR them.
Oh and I don't think Hillary should drop out. I think they should just focus on issues. If they would just be more positive, then campaigning in EVERY state ISNT a bad thing! We are setting up strong grassroots campaigns in every state that can mobilize again for the general election. How is that bad? If they would focus on policies and world events and such, both would be better off.
Posted by: Lindsey | Apr 26, 2008 12:50:14 AM
Typical political spin is all that this is. Clinton's trying to use the fact that Obama voted for the Cheney oil bill against him. Cleverly she tries to make a case of 'action speaks louder than words'. However, to do that she left out major details that show why NEARLY all of the DEMS AND REPUBLICANS VOTED for this bill. The fact is that the reason the tax break was asked for was that the American oil companies wanted more money to expand their capacity to convert crude oil. They also wanted to do more exploration and tried to get into Alaska again and the initial bill was tossed out. The Dems wanted a mandatory plan included that called for mandatory spending of billions of this money on green research and climate change studies and the Oil companies eventually conceded. That's why Obama and the majority of the DEMS voted for this bill - not because of any benefits to oil companies but because it made their green research spending mandatory in spite of Bush's opposition to dealing with the climate change issue. That's why you shouldn't listen to clips of info to make fundamental decision. Clinton opposed the bill because she has undeniable ties to overseas oil in Saudi Arabia. The actions of American oil companies to expand their own oil assets is in direct competition with Gulf oil as it lessens American dependence oil foreign oil in the long run.
Posted by: Mike | Apr 26, 2008 12:25:02 AM
@Lindsay: Such as talking the game of *not* taking oil PAC money, but leaving out the pesky little detail about all the bundled donations of Big Oil Execs? Yes, let's discuss Obama's vision for the futherance of Corp America ownership of the nation in the same way Bush/Cheney envision.
Posted by: UnHolyTruth | Apr 26, 2008 12:21:08 AM
Those of you who doubt Senator Obama's capabilities or the "substance" of his campaign, please educate yourself first and then you can complain justly if you still feel that way. All his experiences and stances on issues and plans are on his website in a very user friendly way. It's easy to find the issues that you feel strongly about. Also if you want to hear the context of Rev. Wright's speech I believe the entire sermon is on CNN's website.
But please, if you want to argue, than argue over SUBSTANTIAL ISSUES and not 6 degrees of separation and flag pins. I am offended that the media and Washington thinks these non-issues sways my political opinions. Don't any of you feel like they are insulting your intelligence when they continually talk about that stuff for any politician. Let's discuss issues that will affect the world!
Posted by: Lindsey | Apr 26, 2008 12:07:39 AM
It's so sad that not only is Hillary a liar and untrustworthy, but that so are her staff. And now, judging from these comments, her supporters are liars and untrustworthy too.
Posted by: Jeff | Apr 25, 2008 11:40:37 PM
Unfortunately for Jake Tapper, ABC News, and those blindly following the pied-piper, the 'allegations' within these polling questions are matters of Obama's voting record. Nothing more, nothing less. If their thin-skin can't take the heat of Obama's own indisputable voting recird during his 2 Years in the Senate, get out of the kitchen!
Posted by: UnHolyTruth | Apr 25, 2008 9:24:49 PM
Garin is right and the news media know it.
What the Democrats for a number of years cannot stand that Obama prevented two of our states from voting. That is a fatal flaw of the Democrats. Just because Hillary wanted to even allow them to revote will not be remembered. It will be remembered a black man Obamo Huesein did not allow all the people to have a vote. The Republicans will laugh and use this for years.
Posted by: Martha O'Dell | Apr 25, 2008 8:10:35 PM
Are you a registered Democrat? Yes? OK.
Please think about the tactics used by Sen. Clinton's campaign against a fellow Democrat.
Do these tactics leave you with major doubts, some doubts or no real doubts about whether you would like Senator Clinton to be the nominee for your party?
Posted by: Trillium | Apr 25, 2008 7:47:29 PM
Core Democrat; Thanks for the reference to Obama's remarks earlier today. He read entirely from the text. He seemed tired, listless, unengaged.
He should have just issued a press release or called it in for all the inflection in his voice.
Has Obama lost interest in this campaign already? It seems he's not up to the task. At the first setback, he folds.
Actually, what do we know about his work ethic?
Posted by: s. valenti | Apr 25, 2008 6:36:55 PM
Oh so I suppose the negativity displayed by Michelle OBama herself when she said last summer about Hillary Clinton, "if she can't run her own house........... - isn't perceived as being below the belt - It's not just negative, it's offensive.
I wrote off the both Obama's when I heard that sleazy, unclassy remark.
Now, I've written off the DNC who's shown that they can't rein in the character attacks leveled against Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton. Remember him? - the only democrat re-elected to a full 8 year term in almost 50 years.
Posted by: s. valenti | Apr 25, 2008 6:29:06 PM
To say that Hillary Clinton is a liar is probably an understatement to say the least. She's up on charges of possible felony purgery in the LA Superior Court as well as campaign fraud when she was running for her senate seat.
PETER F PAUL VS WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON
Posted by: Julia | Apr 25, 2008 6:07:26 PM
Listen to yourselves. There is not one substantive argument in this thread. No one is arguing about who actually has solutions to the problems this country faces. You're all using campaign buzzwords to argue the better candidate.
You are as bad as the candidates, obfuscation is rule number one in popular politics.
The truth is that it doesn't matter which one gets the nomination. The election that matters this fall is not the presidential election, it's the congressional elections that no one is paying any attention to.
Good luck to you all when the Republicans retake control of the Congress, then Obama/Hilary won't have anything to do but refill the veto pen.
As an independent all of this partisan bickering (especially between people who are supposed to be on the same side) sickens me. We have never needed solidarity more than now and this bickering is giving the Republicans the opportunity they need to get back in the race, and they're doing it if you haven't noticed.
We need a third party more than ever, one for all the people who are sick and tired of the political rhetoric and are interested in actually finding solutions to problems, not just taglines for them.
Posted by: Greg | Apr 25, 2008 5:04:46 PM
Hillary Clinton lied about statistics she said came from ABC. She's a liar. It comes too easily. It’s got to be carefully taught…
A Hillary ad blames Bush for loss of jobs in Indiana.
She shoulda blamed Bill Clinton.
Ads: Bill okayed China sale of Indiana factory - Newsday
“Magnequench moved its equipment to China in 2003. But the sale of the company to a Chinese consortium was approved in 1995, during the Bill Clinton administration. In 1988, Congress gave the president authority to block foreign acquisitions that could threaten national security.”
Fear overwhelming the Democratic party - National Post
“If the past few primaries have proved anything, it’s that Democrats are the Nervous Nellies of U.S. politics. They are afraid Americans won’t elect a black man….The Democrats are afraid this latent racism is endemic in “battleground states.”
NY Senator Clinton “didn’t know anything” about Pres. Clinton’s clemency for two convicts fought by widows of two dead NY police officers - Ayers
Posted by: kravitz | Apr 25, 2008 4:03:58 PM
Senator Obama and his election slime machine is a disgrace to America and has hurt the Democratic Party beyond repair. His life and record are filled with lies and distortions. Says he can fix the economy yet when you look at his own district it is one of the most improvish and crime ridden areas in the country. He should fix that first before even thinking of all 50 states' problems. He just wants the POWER but will not fix anything. HE IS ALL TALK--TALK--TALK.
Posted by: Mary | Apr 25, 2008 3:46:59 PM
HoosierSue
Just wondering -- are Hoosiers also so mired in self-pity that they cling to guns and religion and have no concept of important issues? Or was that just characteristic of Pennsylvanians?
Posted by: Aston | Apr 25, 2008 3:27:29 PM
So, Hillary did a push poll. What's the big deal? Everyone does this.
Posted by: David H | Apr 25, 2008 3:12:56 PM
HoosierSue: Very good point. Also, it is kind of interesting that he happened to have a recording device handy.
Posted by: cappamore | Apr 25, 2008 3:08:16 PM
sad to say,
someone else trying to make a name for themselves at the expense of the clinton
I am sure we will soon see someone associated with this on tv pontificating about this and that and assisting the corp to hijack another election.
Posted by: jgaw | Apr 25, 2008 3:00:52 PM
Post a comment


