I attended the Polk County Democrats' women's event tonight, featuring Michelle Obama. Unfortunately, I had to leave before she finished speaking so that my toddler would not disrupt the proceedings.

But wow, she did a great job. I don't have a transcript or notes. The gist of her speech was first, to talk about the tough balancing act women have, and put this in the context of problems we need to solve in this country. Then, she talked about how these issues affecting women motivated her and Barack Obama to pursue a political career instead of taking an easier path (like teaching).

She said she knew what we were all thinking–why should we support Obama when there is a talented woman candidate in the race? (Well, I wasn't thinking that, but there were plenty of Hillary supporters in the crowd.) She hit repeatedly on the “change” theme; I can't remember the exact words, but the main point was that we need to totally change the direction in Washington, not just replace this administration.

I think this is good rhetoric for Obama to use against Hillary; electing her would bring just superficial change–we need to turn the page.

I noticed that Edwards has started to hit on this theme as well. Today he condemned the merger of Rupert Murdoch's News Corp and the Wall Street Journal. He also challenged Democratic presidential candidates not to take money from News Corp execs and to refund any contribution they've already received from them. 

Obviously, this refers to Hillary, the Democrat Rupert Murdoch's minions desperately want us to nominate. She's taken in more than $20,000 from News Corp execs.

Links are here:

http://www.mydd.com/…

http://www.johnedwards.com/news/press-releases/20070802-media-consolidation

The sad truth is that even if Hillary were electable, another Clinton administration would give too much influence to the Washington and corporate insiders who have too much influence today.

Democratic voters are hungry for change, and Hillary will not deliver the bold change we need. We'll be hearing much more on this theme from Obama and Edwards in the coming months.

Not only is it good political rhetoric, it has the advantage of being true. 

To my knowledge, this is the first Iowa caucus poll by Washington Post/ABC. They found:

Obama 27 percent

Clinton 26

Edwards 26

Richardson 11

Biden 2

Kucinich 2

Dodd 1

The link is here:

http://www.washingto…

Not surprisingly, Obama does best among younger voters, but most caucus-goers are likely to be older:

Obama's hope for winning in Iowa appears to depend heavily on his ability to turn younger voters out on caucus night. Iowa's caucus process demands far more of voters than do presidential primaries. Participants must spend several hours at a caucus, and there are no secret ballots. All voting is done in public.

Among Iowa voters younger than 45, Obama has the advantage — 39 percent, compared with 24 percent for Clinton and 22 percent for Edwards. Among those age 45 and older, Clinton and Edwards were tied at 28 percent, with Obama trailing at 18 percent. Four years ago, these older-than-45 voters made up two-thirds of all caucus participants.

In this poll, 31 percent of likely caucus-goers said the upcoming caucuses will be their first. Half of those younger than 45 said this would be their first time out. Converting interest into commitment among younger voters is one big challenge facing Obama's team.

If Obama can mobilize tens of thousands of new voters to come out and caucus, more power to him. I'd love to see that. My hunch is that many precincts just don't have a lot of Democrats under age 45, though.

Recent Iowa polls have been all over the map, which confirms that it's tough to poll the caucuses. My advice to everyone is ignore the polls and work your heart out to GOTV for your favorite candidate.

Over at Iowa Independent Dien Judge reports that “We haven't seen the end of the Clinton-Obama diplomacy feud.”

The chairman of the Democratic Party in Monroe County (southeast Iowa) got a phone call from PSA Interviewing, which conducted a message-testing poll for Clinton in Iowa earlier this year.

Most of the poll questions were about Hillary, and they concerned both policy matters and electability. The survey specifically asked about the CNN/You Tube debate question about whether the president should meet with foreign dictators, and under what conditions.

There's been a lot of debate in the blogosphere over who was helped by this dispute. If Clinton tries to keep this story alive in her speeches and/or campaign ads, it's a safe bet that her internal Iowa polling showed it was a winner for her. If she doesn't bring it up much in the future, we can assume that the polling showed most Iowans agreed with Obama.

ARG, which has shown Clinton leading in Iowa all year, released a new poll today with similar findings. Details and a spirited discussion of this poll can be found over at MyDD. Here are the key findings:

Clinton 30 (down from 32 in last ARG poll)

Edwards 21 (down from 29 in last ARG poll)

Obama 15 (up from 13 in last ARG poll)

Richardson 13 (up from 5 in last ARG poll)

These numbers just don't ring true to me. I don't believe Clinton leads Edwards in Iowa, and certainly not by that kind of a margin. All year ARG has had Clinton around 30 percent in Iowa, and I can't remember any other pollster finding her with support that high.

ARG's new numbers for Republicans in Iowa are also at odds with recent polling by other firms. ARG finds:

Giuliani 22

Romney 21

McCain 17

Undecided 15

Fred Thompson 13

Gingrich 4

all others 2 percent or less 

What do other people think about this poll?

I guess when other firms release their results we'll find out which is the outlier: ARG or the latest KCCI Iowa poll conducted by Research 2000.

I was thinking that it would be helpful to have a box somewhere listing all of the Iowa politicians who have endorsed presidential candidates this year. I know Chris Woods has been keeping track of those, but I don't have a comprehensive list. Even if I did, I am not able to redesign the page.

What do people think? Is this a feature you'd like to see at Bleeding Heartland? Might be useful as a reference.

Speaking of which, has Patty Judge endorsed Edwards? Someone told me yesterday that she has, but I don't remember reading about it, and I couldn't find a link on the Des Moines Register website. 

Judging from the low number of undecideds, they pushed leaners too hard, but for what it's worth, here is the latest KCCI Iowa poll conducted by Research 2000, conducted July 23-July 25:

Edwards 27

Clinton 22

Obama 16

Richardson 11

Biden 3

Kucinich 2

Dodd 2

Gravel 1 

Undecided 16

It's good news for Edwards that there was no “Bubba bump” for Hillary–on the contrary, she was down 6 points compared to the last Research 2000 Iowa poll in May. Not good news for Obama at all. But the movement is not far outside the 4 percent margin of error for this poll. I still believe that around half of Iowa Democrats are undecided.

On the Republican side:

Romney 25 

F. Thompson 14

Giuliani 13

McCain 10

Gingrich 6

Huckabee 2

T. Thompson 2

Tancredo 2

Brownback 2

Hunter 1

Paul 1

Undecided 22 

How depressed would you be if you were Tommy Thompson, Huckabee, Brownback or Tancredo? Clearly the GOP base is unhappy with the crop of frontrunners, yet these second-tier conservative candidates can't get any kind of traction, despite spending lots of time in Iowa.

I don't know what is going to happen on the GOP side. It looks like everyone is unelectable to me, but someone is going to emerge from the primaries. Please, let it be Gingrich! 

Over at MyDD, Todd Beeton put up a thread linking to a Newsweek story about the brand messaging of major presidential candidates, based on their bumper stickers.

Click the link to the Newsweek story and scroll down to see a designer's expert analysis. He liked Hillary's branding, thought Obama's design looked good, and considered Edwards' use of a green trail off a star “crazy and daring.”

I had to go look at my own bumper sticker; not being a visual person, I hadn't even noticed there was any green on the Edwards sticker.

On the Republican side, he thought McCain had the worst logo and didn't like the militaristic star. Rudy's logo looks like “a brick wall,” and Mitt Romney's sticker looks like it belongs to “someone who's not going to win.” 

I also encourage you to read the comments below Beeton's post, because several MyDD readers had interesting things to say. For instance, Hillary's bumper sticker is apparently too tall to fit on old-fashioned chrome bumpers–only would work on newer vehicles. 

Several commenters also agreed with me that while McCain's logo may not be great, Romney's is by far the worst. McCain at least has good branding if he wants to appeal to the veterans' vote, which is important in GOP primaries.

What do you think about these and other bumper stickers? Have you seen many lately? Driving around town, I've just seen a few Edwards and Obama stickers, plus one Hillary sticker and one for Ron Paul.

I wasn't able to watch because of the kids–will try to catch it later.

Who did well, who missed opportunities, who stole the show?

UPDATE: If you missed the debate, check out the great liveblog  over at Iowa Independent.

I haven't found all of the candidate-submitted videos in one place. I liked the Edwards “hair” video–the music and the visuals make it quite memorable.

My dad was a Rockefeller Republican. He was disappointed by the turn the party took in the 1980s and 1990s, and though he died before George W. Bush was selected president, I've always felt that he would have definitively made the break from the GOP during this decade.

At the same time, I've felt that the number of disenchanted Rockefeller Republicans (liberal on social issues and supportive of things like progressive taxation and the estate tax) is not big enough to cost the GOP much in the electoral arena.

Tonight I ran into a former colleague of my father's, whom I hadn't seen in a long time. It was an eye-opening conversation to me; the circle of Republicans who are disgusted by their party's standard-bearers is broader than I had realized.

More after the jump. 

It's ridiculously early for yard signs–I don't think any of the Democrats are handing them out yet. So I was surprised to see a “Ron Paul–Hope for America” yard sign today in a fairly Democratic neighborhood on the west side of Des Moines.

If you know Des Moines, the house is just off Polk Blvd, close to the Waveland Cafe. I don't know the precinct number, but if memory serves, this was an area where Kucinich was viable in 2004.

Anyone else seen any yard signs up yet?

I'm tied up this morning and can't go to either event, but Hillary Clinton will give a speech on Iraq at 10 am Tuesday at the Temple for Performing Arts in downtown Des Moines.

At the same time, Obama will hold a town hall meeting on the economy at DMACC's urban campus.

Link:

http://www.siouxcity…

Who can build a bigger crowd on such short notice? Hillary's campaign announced the event on Saturday, Obama's campaign announced on Monday.

If you attend either of these events, post a comment below to tell us what you thought.

On July 5 Dick Gephardt officially endorsed Hillary Clinton for president. I assume that he will be campaigning for her in Iowa, since he won the caucuses in 1988 and had a fair amount of support here even in his disappointing fourth-place finish last cycle.

My question to Bleeding Heartland readers is, how much does this help Hillary? Gephardt was not viable in my precinct in either 1988 or 2004, and I don't know a lot of people who backed him. I know that he had a lot of support from organized labor. Will they care that he is endorsing Hillary?

Speaking as someone who worked her butt off for Kerry before the last Iowa caucuses, if Kerry came out and endorsed one of the other presidential candidates, I wouldn't even consider rethinking my choice. Kerry's preference among the current Democratic field is totally irrelevant to me.

Will Gephardt's backing carry more weight with the people who supported him?

I wrote a diary for Daily Kos and MyDD about Joe Biden being someone to watch in Iowa. I think it's a mistake for bloggers to be writing him off as a joke.

I put the whole diary after the jump. Be warned: it's long, and some of it is written for an audience that may not understand how the caucuses work.

Bottom line is that none of the front-runners should be taking anything for granted in Iowa. A lot of voters will thoroughly consider all the options before making up their minds.

I'm interested in your comments, either here or at one of the other sites:

http://www.dailykos….

http://www.mydd.com/…

UPDATE: I get mass e-mails from most of the campaigns, including Biden's. In my most surreal blogging-related experience ever, this evening the latest e-mail from his campaign links to my DKos diary!

So I inadvertently started a flamewar on Daily Kos and MyDD today by posting a diary about the Clinton campaign being missing in action from July 4 parades in the Des Moines suburbs. The Clintonistas were outraged that (to their mind) my headline implied that the Clinton campaign did not take part in any parades, when we all know that Bill and Hillary marched in the Clear Lake parade.

You can find the DKos version of the flamewar here here or the MyDD version here (the angry Clinton mob was a little less active at MyDD).

My point was that there was no Clinton campaign presence at the Windsor Heights parade I attended, and according to others I talked to, Clinton's campaign didn't have a vehicle in the Urbandale or West Des Moines parades either.

That surprised me, because Obama, Edwards and Richardson were well represented with campaign workers and/or volunteers. (The organizer of the Windsor Heights parade told me later that Biden's campaign was also in the parade, but I didn't notice them.) 

The Edwards people were able to get quite a few supporter cards signed during these parades. We were watching for people who waved or cheered as the Edwards truck rolled by, and three or four people ran up to those spectators and asked them if they would sign up as Edwards supporters. I didn't catch the number for the WDM parade, but I think they got about 65 cards signed during the Urbandale parade and another 15 to 20 in Windsor Heights.

The team also handed out a lot of Edwards stickers in WDM and Urbandale, but had run out early in the Windsor Heights parade.

Obama and Richardson people were handing out tons of stickers in Windsor Heights. My husband, who was with the kids on the side, was pretty sure he saw an Obama staffer with a clipboard as well, who was probably getting supporter cards signed. He wasn't sure whether anyone with the Richardson group was handing out cards. But yesterday evening at the big Windsor Heights celebration in Colby Park, I saw lots of people still sporting their Obama and Richardson stickers.

The point of my diary was that this was a missed opportunity for the Clinton campaign. Thousands of people watch these parades. I've got to believe there were Clinton supporters and leaners who would have signed up if there had been staffers out there spotting them and asking them. I know staff was probably preoccupied with the Clintons' Iowa tour, but the fact that Obama was in Iowa didn't prevent his campaign from having a strong presence in all of the parades.

A woman I know well in my neighborhood is a Clinton leaner (she says she needs more info about the other candidates before making up her mind). She's a general election voter who rarely votes in primaries. Despite many contacts from me last cycle, she and her husband did not attend our precinct caucus. So she is unlikely to turn up on a list of Ds to target in my precinct. I saw her along the parade route with her kids. If there had been a Clinton presence, I bet she would have taken a sticker or possibly signed up. They could have then targeted her closer to caucus time for GOTV efforts. But how will they find her now?

With Teresa Vilmain running the show and the Vilsacks on board, and plenty of money, I am surprised that the Clinton campaign didn't make sure they had a strong presence in all of the Des Moines-area parades.

What do you think, and which campaigns did you see in your towns? 

Incidentally, the only Republican campaign in the Windsor Heights parade was Brownback's; they were also in Urbandale and West Des Moines. I assume that some of the other Republican candidates were in those larger suburban parades. 

I'm off to march in the Windsor Heights parade with the Edwards group. I don't think I'll be doing any blogging today, but noneedthneed is going to be very busy, so click over to Century of the Common Iowan (link is on the blogroll at the right) for his write-ups.

While you're at it, check out the other Iowa liberal blogs, including John Deeth and Iowa Independent, which have published lots of campaign coverage lately.

I must say, though, that I find it distracting to read those liveblog posts that go backward in time as you're reading from the top down.

Got an e-mail from Tom Harkin announcing that his wife Ruth is endorsing Hillary. Here's an excerpt:

She feels that women who are lucky enough to serve in public office had, and continue to have, a responsibility to opening doors and paving a new way for those seeking other leadership roles. And as Ruth looked closely at who is best suited to do the job of President and to inspire a new generation of leaders, Hillary topped the list.

Thanks a lot, Ruth. If Hillary loses the general to a Republican who puts two or three more Alitos on the Supreme Court, I hope you'll apologize to all women.

Of the many things that bother me about the Hillary Clinton candidacy, one of the biggest is this idea that women are supposed to back her as a pathbreaker (with the corollary that people who don't back her are sexist or can't handle strong women). Hillary would be a weak general election candidate, and I don't even think she would be the best president out of the current field.

The e-mail also mentions that Tom Harkin has no plans to endorse any of the presidential candidates. Smart move, senator. 

without hitting a presidential candidate during the next week in Iowa.

Noneed4thneed's got a comprehensive list of who'll be where over at Century of the Common Iowan. Click through for info on impending visits by Biden, Dodd, Obama, Clinton, Romney, Huckabee and Tancredo.

Got an e-mail from the Biden campaign:

July 3rd: Enjoy a day at the State Capitol. Stop by the Yankee Doodle Pops and then come see Senator Biden's 2:30pm press conference on the steps. Several major State Legislators will be endorsing Biden and you can join in the festivities.

July 4th: March with Senator Biden in the Urbandale Parade. Line up is at 9:30am on 70th St between Palm Dr. and Roseland Dr. The parade starts at 10am. Wave to the crowds and share the excitement of Independence Day as you and Senator Biden< make your way through Urbandale. July 4th: Come to Senator Biden's backyard Barbecue hosted at the home of Nate and Meg Boulton. Guests are welcome at 1:30pm. This is a great chance to experience the Senator and Presidential Candidate one on one, ask questions, and enjoy a beautiful day. For details or to RSVP please contact Raena, Raena@JoeBiden.com or 515-440-2008.

Anyone know who's planning to endorse Biden?

Anyone keeping track of the statehouse endorsements so far? The only one I know of for sure is Staci Appel, who's on the Hillary bandwagon. 

As usual, I'm taping the debate to watch later, after the kids are in bed.

If you watched, let us know what you thought. Who won? Who missed a great opportunity? Who had the best line? 

As I talk to voters in my precinct who caucused in 2004, I am finding that very few of them have watched the first two debates. I think people will tune in more in the fall. 

There have been some claims that Hillary Clinton is “push-polling” against her main rivals, Barack Obama and John Edwards in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Her campaign appears to have commissioned some detailed message testing in both states. That is different from a sleazy push-poll (such as what Bush did to McCain in South Carolina in 2000, having people call up voters asking if it would change their opinion if they knew that McCain had an illegitimate black child).

Nevertheless, this kind of survey rubs some voters the wrong way. This Daily Kos diarist described it as “push-ish” polling.

I don't have a problem with message testing–I was a respondent on a lengthy message-testing survey commissioned by Chet Culver before last year's gubernatorial primary. I do think it's sleazy for Democrats to attack each other using right-wing talking points, but I don't blame campaigns for wanting to know which messages are going to be effective for and against them.

That said, I would really like to know which candidates are doing these surveys, and what kinds of messages they are testing. If you get a call like this, please try to remember the questions (taking notes if needed), and put up a diary afterwards. Or, if you prefer, you could share your info with me by e-mail (desmoinesdem AT yahoo.com). I will not reveal your identity.

Last week was a significant one in Bill Richardson's campaign for President, with a major address in Washington, D.C. on climate change and how to end the bloodshed in Iraq, along with a visit to Iowa. 

It was also a significant week for peace and stability in Korea and Asia – which highlights Richardson's expertise in foreign affairs and his diplomatic skills. With Richardson as President we get two for the price of one – a can-do leader on domestic issues and an experienced diplomat that knows how to bring people and nations together.

Seriously, Newsday breaks a story that he couldn't make time to attend the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group meetings, because he was too busy giving $100,000 speeches.

Then his Iowa campaign chairman, Jim Nussle, takes a job in the sinking ship that is the Bush White House.

Then his South Carolina campaign chairman gets indicted on federal cocaine charges.

Talk about a bad week! Stick a fork in him–he's done. 

UPDATE: Mike Glover of the AP covers Rudy's answers to some tough questions. Apparently he expects us to believe that he quit the Baker-Hamilton commission because it “didn't seem that I would really be able to keep the thing focused on a bipartisan, nonpolitical resolution.” 

Here's the schedule I got by e-mail:

Sorry for the short notice–this just arrived today in my in-box. Go here at 4 pm CDT today (Wednesday) to participate:

    http://ChrisDodd.com…
  

UPDATE: I got a robocall telling me that Senator Dodd will be speaking at the Des Moines Public Library downtown on Tuesday, June 26, at noon. The main topic will be his national service plan, although I imagine he'll take questions on other topics too.

Didn't see any other public events listed on the Dodd campaign website, but if you're interested, check again in a few days. I assume he'll hold more than one event on this Iowa trip. 

A new Mason-Dixon Iowa poll was released today. Of 400 likely Democratic caucus-goers, 27 percent said they were undecided, followed by Clinton with 22 percent, Edwards with 21 percent, Obama with 18 percent, Richardson with 6 percent, and Biden with 4 percent.

The Clintonistas are triumphant over at MyDD, confident that Teresa Vilmain is already delivering the goods for Hillary, and that Bill Clinton's three-day campaign swing through Iowa in early July is going to seal the deal.

Wishful thinking, in my view. I have a question for Bleeding Heartland readers: how many undecided voters do you know who have NOT ruled out Hillary?

I know exactly two, out of scores and scores of undecided Iowa caucus-goers I have talked to over the last two months.

If 27 percent of Iowans really are undecided (and I wouldn't be surprised if the true proportion of undecideds is higher than that), then Hillary is going to fall behind once they make up their minds.

I wouldn't be surprised if Bill's visit gives Hillary a little bounce here, but ultimately, Iowans will understand that voting for Hillary is like voting for a Republican to appoint the next two or three Supreme Court justices. No thanks. 

I just got this press release on the Sierra Club Iowa topics e-mail list:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 19 June 2007
Contact: Josh Dorner, 202.675.2384

                    Senate Says Firm No to Liquid Coal
         Vote Puts the Public Interest Ahead of Special Interests

          Statement of Carl Pope, Sierra Club Executive Director

“In spite of Herculean efforts by the coal industry and its friends in
Congress, the Senate today delivered a very important victory in the fight
against global warming by decisively voting against jumpstarting a new
massively expensive, massively polluting liquid coal industry–twice.
Senators showed that they understood that we need to leave behind the
failed policies of the past–and past Congresses.

“At a time when we need to get on the path to achieving an 80 percent
reduction in our global warming emissions by 2050–an achievable annual
reduction of 2 percent–the level scientists tell us is necessary to avoid
the most catastrophic effects of global warming, business as usual is no
longer acceptable.  Liquid coal produces nearly twice the global warming
pollution as conventional fuel and Senators were right to turn their backs
on it.

“Though Senators successfully blocked these damaging liquid coal
provisions, they now need to turn their attention to breaking a filibuster
led by Senator Domenici that is preventing a fair up or down vote on the
Bingaman Renewable Electricity Standard amendment.  Senators must also
block attempts by Senators Levin, Bond, and Pryor to further weaken the
CAFE compromise in the bill.

“We thank Senators for their leadership on this important vote and hope
they will continue to make the changes necessary to make this bill one that
we can truly be proud of.”

The person who posted the press release noted that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton both voted FOR the coal to oil subsidy, which thankfully did not pass the Senate.

That is pathetic. I'm not surprised that Hillary voted yes, because the Clintons have never seemed to care much about the environment.

But for Obama to support this subsidy for the coal industry suggests to me that he is not serious about dealing with global warming. Dodd, Richardson, and Edwards all have put forward superior proposals on this issue. 

UPDATE: Here is a link to the Senate roll call vote on liquid coal:

http://www.senate.go…

Of the presidential candidates, Clinton and Obama voted yes, Biden voted no, Dodd, McCain and Brownback did not vote. (I'm sure Dodd would have voted no.) 

Harkin and Grassley both voted no. 

Six months ago, before Tom Vilsack dropped out of the race, I predicted that Hillary Clinton would finish fourth in the Iowa caucuses. When he quit, I thought Hillary might finish second or third instead (behind Edwards, who I still think will win Iowa).

But I'll tell you what–Bill Richardson spent his money wisely on those early tv ads. My unscientific conversations with caucus-going Democrats in Des Moines and the suburbs tell me that a lot of people are interested in Richardson and want to learn more.

Although I've not met many firm Richardson backers, very few undecided voters are telling me that they have ruled him out. That gives him tremendous potential to grow his support as people make their minds up late in the game.  

The question in my mind is, can Richardson assure Iowans that he has not only great experience, but also a strong policy agenda and campaign skills? He seemed uncomfortable with the format of the first two debates, but fortunately for him, hardly anyone I talk to seems to have watched those debates (even the people who caucused in 2004 and will surely do so again).

If Richardson can convince people that he has bold ideas and is a good enough campaigner to win a general election, I expect his numbers to go way up in Iowa. A lot of people are more comfortable supporting a governor anyway. 

The governor is coming to Iowa next weekend. If you see him in person, put up a diary afterwards to let us know how he is connecting with live audiences.

John Deeth put up his liveblog of a Mitt Romney event in Muscatine, and this part jumped out at me:

Health care and portability and preexisting. “The Democrats have their answer: Socialized medicine Hillary care is not the answer.” Big applause. Cites Mass. program and private sector.

The Republicans are so clueless. Hillary would do less to shake up the for-profit health insurance industry than practically anyone else in the Democratic field. It would be baby steps at most on health care. Nothing nearly as bold as what Obama and Edwards are offering, and certainly not single-payer, as Kucinich is advocating.

Even single-payer (“Medicare for all”) is not really socialized medicine, because the government would not be running all the hospitals and doctors' offices. The government would just be the payer.

But arguing these points with Republicans is pointless. They have decided that ultra-left-wing Hillary is for socialized health care, and they will pound this point home. 

Hillary Clinton would be an incredibly weak general election candidate–she's got all the downsides of the leftist image with none of the upside of a truly progressive policy agenda.

Barack Obama will be in Webster City and Boone on Saturday, June 16.

He'll be in Newton and Ottumwa on Monday, June 18. 

Details about these events are after the jump, along with info about some other Obama campaign events which are taking place without the candidate (for instance, a Sioux City Women for Obama event on Thursday, June 14, an Iowa City fundraising barbecue for Obama on Saturday, June 16, and a Delaware County Women for Obama event on Friday, June 22).

If you attend any of these events, please share your impressions in a diary.

According to a press release from the campaign, the focus will be on health care. 

Friday, John Edwards will hold public events in Marshalltown and Tama.

Saturday, John and Elizabeth Edwards will be in Grinnell, Coralville, Iowa City, West Branch, Tipton, and Clinton.

Sunday, John and Elizabeth Edwards will be in northwest Iowa: Sioux City, Le Mars, Cherokee, Storm Lake, Sac City and Carroll.

The details about these appearances are after the jump. If you can attend one of them, put up a diary afterwards to let us know your impressions of the speakers and the mood of the crowd.

Also, John Edwards will be on the Iowa Public TV show Iowa Press this weekend. I believe that airs on Friday evening and again on Sunday morning. Check local listings.

Got an e-mail from the Polk County Democrats. Bill Richardson will be in town for the grand opening of his downtown Des Moines headquarters. Details about this event on Friday, June 22, are after the jump.

UPDATE: Governor Richardson will hold an event in Ankeny right after this grand opening: Ankeny's Neveln Center, 406 SW School St on Friday, June 22 at 7:00 PM.  Refreshments will be provided.  Free and open to the Public.  

Check out Matt Browner-Hamlin's diary to the right, where you can watch the new ads Chris Dodd is airing in Iowa and NH.

They are basically biographical pieces. I especially liked the second one. I was not aware of Dodd's role in passing the Family and Medical Leave act. Although that act doesn't go far enough for many families, it was still an enormous step forward, and I know tons of young parents who appreciate it.

Noneed4thneed is going to have to explain to me how to embed a YouTube video. Meanwhile, here is a web link to the latest edition in Bill Richardson's “job interview” ad series:

http://www.youtube.c…

He focuses on what he did as governor of New Mexico regarding global warming and renewable fuels. 

Environmentalists are an important voting bloc in Democratic primaries. I know some environmentalists for Edwards and some for Obama, but most are undecided. I think many would consider Richardson as well, so he is smart to be emphasizing this aspect of his resume.

UPDATE: The significant announcement was that the Edwards campaign has appointed county chairs as well as rural outreach chairs in all 99 counties in Iowa. 

Got this e-mail from the Edwards campaign. Anyone planning to be in Waterloo on Tuesday? I have no idea what the “significant announcement” is all about:

 

ELIZABETH EDWARDS TO ATTEND CAMPAIGN OFFICE OPENING IN WATERLOO

 

Will Also Make Significant Organizational Announcement

 

Waterloo, Iowa – Elizabeth Edwards will visit Iowa on Tuesday, June 12^th to talk to caucus goers about Senator Edwards’ detailed plans and vision for America .  Mrs. Edwards will officially open the John Edwards for President campaign office in Waterloo and will make a significant new announcement about the campaign’s statewide grassroots organization.

TUESDAY, JUNE 12TH, 2007
6:00 PM
Elizabeth Edwards will to attend John Edwards for President Campaign office opening
425 Franklin Street
Suite B
Waterloo, Iowa

At Political Wire, Taegan Goddard called my attention to this poll by the Center for Rural Strategies.

Although rural voters are more conservative than the average American, this poll found that rural voters prefer a generic Democratic candidate for president by 46 percent to 43 percent. Bush crushed Kerry among rural voters in the 2004 election, winning that demographic by 19 points.

This isn't my main reason for supporting John Edwards for president, but I think Edwards is the candidate best able to connect with the rural and small-town electorate, bringing more of them back to the Democratic Party. I know quite a few people in the sustainable agriculture community, and many told me during the last election cycle that Edwards was by far the favorite candidate in their localities.

Needless to say, I suspect that Hillary Clinton would be the worst candidate we could nominate from this perspective–the 1990s were the decade in which rural voters abandoned the Democratic Party in droves.

The Center for Rural Strategies also found that rural voters prefer a named Democrat for Congress as well by 46 percent to 44 percent.

This finding about Iraq also caught my eye:

While a narrow majority opposes the war, nearly 60 percent are close to someone serving or who has served in the fighting.

That is a massive percentage. In the Des Moines area, I know of quite a few people who have family members in Iraq, but it's nowhere near 60 percent of the people I know.

I read the Des Moines Register's write-up on Tom Tancredo's visit to NW Iowa in the Sunday edition, and I think it's time for reporters covering Tancredo to go beyond reporting his outrageous claims and ask him to provide some evidence to back them up.

We've known for a long time that Tancredo is a one-trick pony, playing on the right wing's resentment against Spanish-speaking immigrants, fanned by the conservative hate radio machine. 

But I hadn't realized before reading this article that Tancredo actually blames immigrants for every problem plaguing America. Tancredo seems to think the main problem in our education system is the hordes of illegal immigrants whose children flood our schools. Nowhere in the article do I see a hint that a reporter asked him about what percentage of our school districts serve a significant population of illegal immigrants. 

Here's Tancredo talking about health care, channeling Moe Siszlyak of The Simpsons (“I knew it was the immigints! Even when it was the bears, I knew it was the immigints!”):

Tancredo touted his support for “market-place competition” in health care and personal health savings accounts, but added that “were we to deal with the illegal immigration problem, we could significantly reduce our costs for health care.”

Really? Illegal immigrants are a significant reason that the US is spending 14 percent of our GDP on health care? Again, I see no sign that a reporter has asked Tancredo or a Tancredo staffer to provide evidence backing up this claim.

Tancredo linked immigration to our environmental problems, since immigration is largely responsible for our population growth:

“If we continue on this path, there will be a billion people here by the end of the century,” Tancredo added. “And if there are, what do you think that does to our environment? Americans consume more and produce more waste than anybody else. If you're worried about the environment, why aren't you worried about the fact we are bringing in millions and millions of people?

Kind of interesting to see this conservative, anti-choice Republican so concerned about population growth and U.S. consumption. Did the Register's correspondent ask Tancredo whether he has ever sponsored legislation aimed at reducing the amount of waste produced by American consumers?

Also, his population numbers seem way off. What credible source has predicted that the U.S. population will hit 1 billion by the end of this century?

The last straw for me was this passage:

Tancredo touched briefly on what he said was the increased number of vaccine-resistant diseases being introduced into the United States from other countries, then forged ahead to what he said is illegal immigration's impact on national security.

This is loathsome propaganda designed to dehumanize immigrants among the Republican electorate. Maybe the reporter or the DM Register's editors think that “what he said was” is sufficient to suggest to the reader that Tancredo's claim might not be true. But this was crying out for a follow-up by the correspondent–what vaccine-resistant diseases is Tancredo talking about? Are there any?

Did the Register contact the Centers for Disease Control to verify this claim?

Come on, campaign trail reporters, be more than stenographers.

UPDATE: Don at Cyclone Conservatives attended Tancredo's Sioux City immigration forum on Saturday and loved what he heard from Tancredo and his Iowa campaign director, Bill Salier. 

Sorry, I meant to put up a post yesterday about this weekend's campaign events. This is from Saturday's Register:

  Saturday

DEMOCRAT HILLARY CLINTON

Indianola:  4 p.m., fundraiser for state Sen. Staci Appel, Warren County Fairgrounds, Lester Building.

Ames: 6:30 p.m., Story County Democrats fundraiser, Prairie Moon Winery, 3801 W. 190th St.

DEMOCRAT BARACK OBAMA

Dubuque: Noon; canvass kickoff for “Walk for Change” event at Lincoln Elementary School, 555 Nevada St.

BEAU BIDEN, SON OF DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE JOE BIDEN

Des Moines: 1 p.m., house party, home of Drake law professor Dan Power, 3816 John Lynde Road.
Ames: 7 p.m., Story County Democrats fundraiser, Prairie Moon Winery, 3801 W. 190th St.

 

Continue Reading...

Up at BlueSunbelt.com, sometime Bleeding Heartland commenter Rob called my attention to a new video released by the Edwards campaign, which features Joe Trippi and Jonathan Prince trying to bake a pecan pie, followed by Elizabeth Edwards making a fundraising pitch.

The video is on the Edwards campaign site here. The idea is that if you donate at least $6.10 between now and June 10, which is John Edwards' birthday, you can get a copy of his mother Bobbie Edwards' famous pecan pie recipe. 

The Edwards campaign sent out an e-mail several days ago regarding this birthday/pie recipe fundraiser, and according to the campaign site, more than 4,000 people have donated.

I watched the video, which was amusing. I'm not sure how many people who You Tube are old enough to recognize the “Odd Couple” music in the background, but the video is unusual enough to stand out among the usual candidate bio material.

Frankly, I have no idea if this is going to work, but Joe Trippi is certainly showing some of that creativity he's famous for.

The Des Moines Register reports that Teresa Vilmain, perhaps the top political operative in Iowa, is replacing JoDee Winterhof as Iowa state director for Hillary Clinton. Vilmain had been working for Tom Vilsack's presidential campaign before he dropped out. Winterhof will now be a senior strategist for the Clinton campaign in Iowa. She commented:

“The significance of the change is bringing on someone at Teresa's level, with her level of experience and history in the state and history with the caucuses,” Winterhof said in an interview. “That is one more piece of evidence of how serious Senator Clinton is taking this campaign, how serious our effort here in Iowa is.”

Nate Willems comments at MyDD that Vilmain is in the same league as John Norris, who ran John Kerry's campaign in Iowa last cycle. Willems adds,

the idea is that Hillary Clinton has made the one big hire that has the potential to turn her campaign around in Iowa.  I don't know if Vilmain can do for Clinton what Norris did for Kerry, but if I were working for either Obama or Edwards in Iowa today, my paranoia level would have just gone through the roof.

Clinton has been lining up the support of some big Vilsack donors as well, including Bill Knapp and most recently Jerry Crawford.

Why these smart Democrats can't see that Hillary would be a disaster for us in down-ticket races (not just in Iowa, but in much of the country) I don't know, but I am not feeling paranoid at all.

In fact, I am glad that expectations for the Clinton campaign will now rise.

What is her excuse going to be if she comes in a distant third on caucus night now?

(Probably that Iowans are sexist, but I hope the MSM won't buy that line. Iowa Democrats are not sexist. We have nominated two women for governor and at least five for U.S. representative.) 

I urge all Iowa supporters of the other presidential candidates to redouble your efforts to GOTV for the candidate of your choice. We have the opportunity to derail the Clinton inevitability train. Let's not waste it.