by John McCormick, updated at 3:18 p.m.
NASHUA, N.H. – Although she did not directly name them, Sen. Hillary Clinton just delivered an extended riff where she mocks the "change" message of Sen. Barack Obama and to a lesser extent, former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards.
"If you give a speech saying you're going to vote against the Patriot Act, and you don't, that's not change," she said. "If you say that you're going to prevent members of Congress from having lunch with lobbyists…but they can still have lunch standing up, that's not change. If you say that you passed the Patient's Bill of Rights, but you forget to add that it never got signed into law, that's not change. If you rail against the special interests, like the oil companies and all the giveaways and tax breaks they've been given, but you voted for Dick Cheney's energy bill, that's not change. If you gave a speech, and a very good speech, against the war in Iraq in 2002 and then by 2004 you're saying you're not sure how you would have voted, and by 2005, 2006 and 2007, you vote for $300 billion for the war you said were against, that's not change."
Speaking in the same high school field house as Obama the day before, Clinton appeared this afternoon before a crowd roughly the same size as the one that the Illinois Democrat attracted.
"They say there are about 3,000 people here," she said as she took the stage about an hour behind schedule, perhaps a slight exaggeration of the actual count.
Political reporters and the campaigns had been eagerly awaiting a crowd comparison between Saturday's event and the one today.
Obama's campaign said yesterday that he drew about 2,500 to the high school. The crowd looks about the same today.
As Obama did, Clinton's campaign is using an overflow gym to pack in the people who waited outside in a line that stretched about a quarter mile. And traffic was just as bad, as people fought over parking spots in the school lot and along neighboring streets.
In a swipe at Obama, Clinton said Democrats need to nominate a "a doer, not a talker."
While she said there are "good, good, people" in the race, she stressed that there are "differences and those differences are important."
In a veiled reference to Obama's eloquence as a speaker, Clinton said politicians need to "campaign in poetry, but govern in prose. And we need a president who can govern."
She said she wants to be liked, but that voters should not base their decision on who is more enjoyable to be around.
"We all want to be likable, and I think it's good to have a likable president," Clinton said. "But if I remember…a lot of people said they were voting for George Bush because they wanted to have a beer with him. And maybe they should have left it at that. Have a beer, don't vote him in as our president."
One voter asked her what her husband would be called if she is elected.
"I'll call him Bill," she deadpanned, adding there might have to be a naming contest. "He'll still be Mr. President. He could be first mate. Our Scottish friends have suggested first lady."
This morning, meanwhile, the New York senator stopped at a bank parking lot in Manchester, N.H., to rally with about 100 volunteers, including some who planned to go knock on doors today on her behalf.
"Wow it's a great morning," she said as she stepped off her campaign bus. "I've got about three days of voice left."
But the stop had some sound glitches.
First, the microphone didn't work, so Clinton tried a bullhorn that was handed to her. But that was only making a siren sound, not broadcasting her voice. Next, someone handed her a microphone again. It still didn't work.
Noting her hoarse voice, the senator started speaking without amplification, before she was handed a microphone again. It worked this time, but repeatedly cut out as daughter Chelsea Clinton looked at a staff member with disapproving eyes.
"I promise we will have a better sound system the next time I see you," the senator said, before heading out to knock on a few doors.
Also this morning, Clinton's New Hampshire co-chairwoman, Kathy Sullivan, held a conference call with reporters to challenge the change credentials of Obama and former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards.
Sullivan suggested Democrats cannot win a general election with "someone who has one set of positions four years ago, and almost an entirely different set of positions four years later."
The former state party chairwoman said there is plenty to time to blunt any momentum Obama had from his win in Iowa.
"We make our own minds up," she said. "If you look at the history of this thing, you'll see that Iowa typically does not have much of an impact on New Hampshire."
Sullivan also criticized Obama for having a lobbyist as a leader of his New Hampshire campaign. Obama's campaign, meanwhile, maintains that the involvement of Jim Demers, a state lobbyist, does not violate his self-imposed ban on accepting contributions from federal lobbyists.
She said Obama and Edwards had ganged up on Clinton in last night's debate. "Barack Obama and John Edwards had to get together to go after her, while she stands on her own," Sullivan said.
• 
• 
• 
• 
Comments
Clinton is desperate, and will do anything to get a vote. Her claim that Obama has changed over the years is totally misleading and false. Besides, with all of the flip flopping her campaign has been doing over the last year, she hardly has room to talk. All of a sudden she wants t be the change candidate, when before it was all about experience. Obama on the other hand has been consistant since day one of his campaign, He based hit campaign on hope and change, no everybody is talking about change.
I hope that New Hampshire and the U.S. as a whole can see through Hillary's tactics. We can't make the same mistake we did in the last election.
Posted by: jereme ford | January 6, 2008 1:40 PM
Clinton went on a desperate attack... and only made herself look bad. - Stop letting Mark Penn orchestrate your demise. Nice today ? Attack tomorrow. Ooops, a poll - No. Back to nice Hillary today. Get some rest Hillary.
------------------------------------------------------
"Live Free or Die !"
I don't believe that the folks who originally coined that great state motto had in mind selecting a leader based on who they're related to. I think they had quite the opposite in mind.
Nepotism does NOT = Experience.
And birth-right doesn't make anyone 'entitled' in our American Democracy.
Barack Obama for President of the UNITED States of America.
Posted by: Anonymous | January 6, 2008 1:42 PM
Desperate Housewives? Mrs.Clinton, tell us why we should vote for you and not creating fears, like GOP, and Bush about other peoples' choice. You had 16yrs infront of our eyes, to tell us why we should believe in you, if we didn't buy it why do you think we will now??
Posted by: French | January 6, 2008 2:23 PM
Any change from Bush's disastrous warmongering will be welcome. Especially a change from those who enabled him in the first place, and took the eye off the ball in Afghanistan.
Obama has stood consistently for protecting civil liberties, and stood for amendments to the PATRIOT Act, that strengthened them. Don't take my word for it,
read his speech on the Senate floor.
http://obama.senate.gov/speech/060216-floor_statement_2/
http://obama.senate.gov/speech/051215-senate_floor_st/
Change that moves negatively with polls, is not what this country and this world needs.
Posted by: N Shah | January 6, 2008 2:37 PM
This is biased. You fail to mention that in fact, Edwards aligned himself with Barack, they did not team up together as her campaign tried to spin it. It is not fair journalism when you do not unspin, or at least pretend to.
Posted by: erin | January 6, 2008 2:39 PM
This will now be a trend for the Clinton machine. She will follow after Obama to retain the news media and people that were originally there to see him the day before. This is the only reason she had a crowd that size. She even exaggerated that there were 3000 people there to see her. By accounts of the press on site, this was not true. The Clinton’s are a dead dynasty.
Posted by: CJ | January 6, 2008 2:42 PM
"Four score and seven years ago, our fathers brought forth ..." Words and how you say them mean a whole lot, Hillary. They can free a people, they can change a nation. Only Barck Obama has that ability among you. Sorry Hillary and John, it's time for new leadership and a new direction. Only Obama stood out in the NH debate with the cool headed self-control, dignity, and smarts, necessary to be our next president. Hillary was shrill, mocking, almost name-calling in her accusations, like a spurned high school x- sweet heart. But Clinton accusing Obama of flip-flopping?? That's the real shocker of that debate. I guess if the shoe fits you give it to the other guy, that's Clinton logic for you.
Posted by: dr Bob 1001 | January 6, 2008 3:23 PM
Maybe when Obama is president, he will name Hillary the Director of the IRS. A terrifying thought for taxpayers, but it would suit her and I bet collections would improve 100%.
Posted by: Karen | January 6, 2008 4:33 PM
3000 ? filled with Biliary supporters comming from other states to create spin in the buzz like CNN's poll does?
Lol
Posted by: Dave | January 6, 2008 4:37 PM
MTV blog is reporting that the next Clinton event only drew about 200 people. They packed the first rally with out of state political operatives, handed them the obligatory "box lunch included" and sent their tour buses motoring home.
Posted by: Richard Deere | January 6, 2008 5:00 PM
I do feel bad for Hillary. She thought she had the whole thing wrapped up, and now it's slipping away fast. But it seems like she's up against things that are out of her control. People just don't want a re-tread of the 16 years, and she and her advisers are looking tired and out of date.
You gotta smile at some of the stuff she's saying, though. Since when does being married to the president count as hands-on governing experience? And attacking the others for being inconsistent and dishonest...talk about people in glass houses who shouldn't throw stones!
Posted by: Jim Lee | January 6, 2008 5:06 PM
The most experienced person in the field is never mentioned: Bill Richardson. The experience of the others pales in comparison. But, as the comments here show, the U.S. voter is more interested in charisma than substance.
Posted by: Tom | January 6, 2008 5:16 PM
Desperation is so unbecoming... The negative attacks didn't work here in Iowa, they aren't going to work anywhere else either. I guess Mark Penn hasn't figured that out and he's a pollster!
Posted by: Joy | January 6, 2008 5:17 PM
Isn't it telling that Republicans have joined Obama supporters in bashing Hillary? (Just look at editorials across political spectrum). They remember Bill's time and all the changes he brought about. They are not afraid of Obama. They know he'll be very willing to compromise. Have we forgotten how big Pharma and insurance companies went after Hillary by "Kitchen Table" ads? You can not nice right wingers to death. You need to have the fortitude and willingness to be "unlikeable" against the special interest.
Posted by: David A. | January 6, 2008 5:32 PM
Bill Clinton was an excelent president.
But i still dont get to understand wy his wife would do a good job too.
That´s what she basically is. Clinton´s wife
So what?
Posted by: j a r | January 6, 2008 5:57 PM
Is this what you call free speech?
Posted by: juan ramirez | January 6, 2008 6:40 PM
Unless people are blind, deaf and dumb, there is no way to see that Hillary Clinton wasn't the leader in the New Hampshire Democratic debates on January 5. As she so skillfully displayed in the debate, Hillary Clinton is the only candidate with a comprehensive plan to carry out all that "hope" and "change" that keeps being tossed around in the presidential campaign. It was so obvious that it actually seemed to cause the other candidates to revert into some kind of boyish ganging-up on Hillary, like school boys intent on usurping the smartest girl in the class. Despite all the oratorical skills he has, Barack Obama just caved in on himself during the entirety of the debate, unsettled as he was in the presence of Mrs. Clinton and her brilliant mind.
I am also AMAZED at the underbelly of misogyny that has surfaced in the mainstream media with regard to Mrs. Clinton. I'm sure she herself can handle it, but I'm not sure the country can take another unprepared and incompetent president. The future of our country is at stake here. This is not a popularity game show. This is not "American Idol". I hope the American people wake up to this before it is too late.
Posted by: Anne Milligan | January 6, 2008 6:41 PM
Woo...look at all the Obama supporter comments. Scared because she finally called about the fact that Obama has no experience doing anything but being a wonderful orator? She has experience - experience doing what - "changing" things by passing laws, managing committees, campaigning to put more democrats in government, etc. Obama, pure and simple doesn't. And if Obama doesn't want to be called out on his "wrongs" then he shouldn't have them. He talks about how bad lobbiest are, yet his head is a lobbiest. Well, that's a bit contradictory. He says he isn't for the patriot act, but votes for it - contradictory. Says he doen't want to repeal DOMA, but then does a month later. Seems MR. Obama doesn't know up from down.
Posted by: Marsha | January 6, 2008 7:29 PM
Hey Johnny boy, great fluff piece. You forgot to mention the bus loads of out of state surrogates. The piece should be called " Drags Crowds " NH will send this Hillabeast down the road a loser like Iowa did.
Posted by: Habs10 | January 6, 2008 8:08 PM
I got a call from Obamas camp this morning and they told me electing Obama would be a unique priviledge and I'll tell you what I told them.
Americans have already had this unique priviledge 8 and 4 years ago. Bush said during his first campaign that Washington politicans can not be trusted to fix Americans problems. So elect me George Bush. Obama has said the same thing. Neither had or has any idea what their talking about.
Inexperince has gotten thousands of brave soliders dead in Iraq and no way out. And inexperience cost hundreds of New Orleans their lives. And Obama is a politican who has burned bridges and played games to become the Senator he is today. How do you think he got the money to run his campaign? Being a politican makes you dirty in the first place. Favors for political contribtions goes back to George Washington. There is no Mr. Clean politican out there, only a con job on the American people. The only politican above it, is a politican that you have never heard of.
Posted by: Jaqueline | January 6, 2008 9:10 PM
Most comments from Obama supporters appear to be very impressionable and not well informed. Yes, he gives a great inspirational speach, has a good authoritative voice and makes you feel uplifted for a moment - but how good is he with reality and actually getting things done? Hillary, on the other hand, has extensive knowledge, competence and experience and WILL get it done. Does Obama and his supporters really believe the Republicans will play nice with him? Once/if he is nominated they will turn on their trash mashine and I doubt he will be left standing. Please, be realistic and stick with Hillary - we need her strength, experience, competence and dedication.
Posted by: Milda Walters | January 6, 2008 9:14 PM
Isn't it telling that Republicans have joined Obama supporters in bashing Hillary?...They remember Bill's time and all the changes he brought about.
Posted by: David A.
---
What's the A for? Asswipe? Any asswipe who thinks it's a good thing thugs are lining up behind Obama just goes to show what mental midgets appeasers are.
They want Obama because they hate both blacks and women but hate women more, so it's a two-fer. They get to bash Hillary and women (and Clinton, ie, Bill, the Big Dog that they all lined up as underhung in comparison to) now and later they get to put the brown man in his place. Wise up. Or not. We know it's hard for mental midgets to wise up, so
quit trying to run with the pack. Hillary got the only spontaneous applause of the night. Deal with it.
Posted by: Zee | January 6, 2008 11:25 PM
I marvel at the fact that many people are negative toward a former President and First Lady who, if they had not won the election in 1992, we would have had either Ross Perot or George Bush Sr (again) as President. Followed possibly by our current Bush for 8 years after that.
The Clintons came when no other Dem Pres. candidate could win (since Jimmy Carter), and made positive impacts on our lives. Our lives were not too bad were they? I agree with Hillary's statement about some kind of "amnesia" having fallen over during the NH debate. I believe America will finally get it right this time. Because it has to.
Posted by: Lance | January 7, 2008 1:52 AM
More Clinton fraud:
"Clinton recruits out-of-staters to pack rally
Reporters who walked into this Nashua high school today were immediately struck by the crowd — there are visibly more people here for Sen. Hillary Clinton than were here for Sen.Barack Obama yesterday in the same location.
The Clinton crowd was loud and boisterous and their foot-stomping was thunderous.
Many of them were also from Massachusetts.
Clinton gave a few minute speech about how she sees the race for 2008 shaping up, then started taking questions. As she did, I noticed dozens of people start streaming out via the back doors.
Of the 7 people I interviewed, three said they had taken advantage of the short drive to come see both Clinton and Obama in the area in advance of the Feb. 5 Massachusetts primary.
But the others said they were Clinton volunteers who came up to canvass on her behalf this weekend.
Serap Sankoh, a biostatistician from Acton, Mass., said she had been actively recruited to attend and wave signs wildly by the Clinton campaign. "I got the telephone calls not last night but the night before and I'm a die-hard supporter, so I made the drive," she said.
Another reporter noticed a charter bus parked outside — and it wasn't part of our traveling motorcade.
Also, one questioner in the audience was from upstate New York and stood to praise Clinton for helping his city. "I want to stand here today proud to say to New Hampshire that our little city … with the help of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is on the verge of a renaissance," he said.
That prompted Clinton to thank the out-of-staters for "spreading the word." She started to say she was impressed by "the numbers of people who have come on their own from New York" and was interrupted by wild cheers. No way to be sure if the applause came from New Hampshire voters or New Yorkers. Clinton added that yesterday she saw a bunch of people from Arkansas.
She said she wanted the crowd to know: "If you honor me with your vote on Tuesday I will work my heart out for you."
UPDATE, 4:20 P.M. -- When the event ended I talked to some of the out-of-staters, including Julia Fuchs, 65 and a recent graduate student. She was about to board one of the buses back to New York after spending two days in the Granite State for Clinton.
"We are crazy about her. We came here to stump for her, they told me where to go," she said. "The campaign paid for everything."
Fuchs also told me that one questioner who asked about student loans during the event was one of the volunteers from New York."
(from the Washington Times)
Posted by: Bruce | January 7, 2008 10:17 AM
How many of these Independents and Republicans will really vote Democrat? They are only trying to skew our primary. The minute Obama wins, the press will totally destroy him within 24 hrs. just like they have done the Dem front runners in the last 3 elections. Ask yourself, why are peope like, Buchanan, Scarborough and Noonan swooning over Obama? They can't wait to take him down.
Posted by: Donna Lane | January 7, 2008 10:44 AM
What are the chances that this country is going to elect an inexperienced, liberal, peace-nik as our next President?
I can believe the Dems are self-destructing again.
I'm sick of the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. They went for Nader in 2000, effectively giving the election to Bush. And now their going to get Barack Hussain Obama nominated. Geesh.
If this keeps up, I'm voting independent.
Posted by: Patrick Cropper | January 7, 2008 1:45 PM
What are the chances that this country is going to elect an inexperienced, liberal, peace-nik as our next President?
I can believe the Dems are self-destructing again.
As a moderate Democrat, I'm sick of the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. They went for Nader in 2000, effectively giving the election to Bush. And now their going to get Barack Hussain Obama nominated. Geesh.
If this keeps up, I'm voting independent.
Posted by: Patrick Cropper | January 7, 2008 1:47 PM
Donna Lane...good post.
The second Barack Hussain Obama is nominated, the media is going to shift the political conversation back to Iraq, Iran and terrorism.
Within this context, who is the obvious choice of the American people?...an inexperienced, liberal peace-nik?...or John McCain, a grizzled vet, who was right about the "Surge" from the begining.
The liberal wing of the Democratic Party is serving up this election to the Republicans on a silver platter.
Posted by: Patrick Cropper | January 7, 2008 2:02 PM
I am for Obama. Remember that Clinton was a Iraq war supporter. Also she worked for Wal Mart. They do not like Unions.
Why can't we have direct election of President? And why can't we vote on Weekends?
Regards
Richard
Posted by: Reichard White | January 7, 2008 2:38 PM
Barack is an "inexperienced, liberal, peace-nik?" Hmmm. that seems a bit of an over-simplified distortion. Sounds like you are already going "independent." I agree it was a mistake for Dems to go Nader in 2000, but Barack is a pretty classic Dem by most accounts. Sure, he is not a centrist, but a Dem none the less.
Posted by: lawson | January 7, 2008 2:42 PM
oBOMBa will be destroyed by the GOP candidate. It's funny to see the Democrats shooting themselves in the foot again! Enjoy President Huckabee!
Posted by: Reality Hurts | January 8, 2008 3:41 PM