Des Moines Register
11-10-07
Distinctive styles used to criticize Clinton
Barack Obama frames his differences with the New York senator as a conflict of
ideology; John Edwards has been more aggressive and direct in his attacks.
By THOMAS BEAUMONT
REGISTER STAFF WRITER
Democratic presidential candidates John Edwards and Barack Obama have
zeroed in on national front-runner Hillary Clinton in recent weeks, albeit in distinct
ways that reflect their own backgrounds and campaign themes.
Their competing styles, as the two vie to emerge in Iowa as the stronger Clinton
alternative, will be in full view in Des Moines today at the Iowa Democratic Party's
Jefferson-Jackson Day banquet, where six presidential candidates are scheduled
to appear.
Clinton, Edwards and Obama, as well as Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, Connecticut
Sen. Chris Dodd and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, will also try to impress
the roughly 9,000 Democratic activists and hundreds of journalists attending the
marquee event marking kickoff of the 2008 caucus campaign's final stretch.
The event comes as Edwards and Obama have begun trying harder to trip up
Clinton, a New York senator, who has inched ahead in Iowa. Their tone has
injected the 10-month-old race with a sense of urgency as the Jan. 3 caucuses
approach.
Edwards, a former North Carolina senator, has been more aggressive and direct
than Obama in attacking Clinton. Edwards' way recalls his successful career as a
courtroom lawyer and reflects his second presidential bid's populist edge.
Obama, an Illinois senator, discusses his differences with Clinton more as a
conflict of ideology than of individuals. The tack fits with Obama's experience as
a constitutional law instructor and his claim to be above divisive tactics.
"Obama doesn't seem ready to pick up the banner and throw punches the way
Edwards has," said Rachel Paine Caufield, an associate Drake University
political science professor. "Edwards is really coming out fighting."
Edwards and Obama each have attacked Clinton for supporting a measure in the
Senate in September that allowed the Bush administration to impose economic
sanctions against Iran. They argued the vote would help Bush, should he decide
to order military action in Iran.
Both Edwards and Obama also have criticized Clinton for stopping short of
calling her vote for the 2002 resolution allowing the war in Iraq a mistake.
But Edwards has been more dogged in recent weeks in pointing to what he sees
as differences in his commitment to ending the war and Clinton's.
"With less than 60 days to the caucus, Senator Clinton has still not given specific
answers to specific questions. How many troops will she withdraw, and when will
she withdraw them?" Edwards said during the Iowa City speech Monday.
Edwards has said he would immediately withdraw at least 40,000 troops, launch
an intense diplomatic effort to end sectarian violence and have all combat troops
out of Iraq in less than a year.
Clinton has said she will begin planning to end the war immediately upon taking
office, if she is elected. But she has not proposed a specific timetable for
withdrawing troops from Iraq.
Clinton has noted while campaigning in Iowa the sharpened criticism, attributing
it to her lead in national polls and recent edge in Iowa. She has responded by
pledging to remain positive, while dispatching to Iowa former President Bill
Clinton, who has defended the new attacks as unfair.
"Iowans will have to decide for themselves if this reflects a new kind of politics, or
the same old politics that both men have decried," Clinton campaign spokesman
Mo Elleithee said.
The trial attorney vs. the professor
Iowa State University professor Dianne Bystrom said Edwards has been
more confrontational than Obama, presenting the contrasts as evidence to make
a larger point.
"Edwards really is a trial attorney. You can really see that in his campaign style,"
said Bystrom, an expert in debate strategy and campaign advertising.
Edwards said the individual differences he describes are aimed at creating doubt
about Clinton's trustworthiness.
"Because of the damage to the trust relationship between America and its
president ... I do think it's crucial that we have a president whose honesty and
sincerity make the president trustworthy," Edwards said in a Des Moines Register
interview.
Obama signaled last month in interviews with the New York Times his plan to
take on Clinton more aggressively than he had, although he has been less
pointed than Edwards about her in front of Iowa audiences.
"If I have a serious difference with Senator Clinton, I've made that difference
absolutely clear and I will continue to do so," he told reporters while campaigning
in the Des Moines area Friday. "Understand, we have always said we're going to
try to run a different kind of campaign."
Obama is less consistent than Edwards about mentioning Clinton by name when
he campaigns, although he has taken pains to reach out to media organizations
to level specific criticisms against her.
Campaigning in eastern Iowa this week, he noted his difference with Clinton by
name on the Iran measure. But he was less direct in explaining ways the
Democratic Party has compromised, a common complaint among Clinton critics
from the party's liberal wing.
"We won't say what we're going to do to strengthen Social Security ... or we don't
want to vote against Bush on a war resolution in Iraq because we don't want to
look soft on national security or terrorism," Obama told an audience in Muscatine
Wednesday.
Campaigning in Iowa last month, Obama specifically accused Clinton of dodging
the issue of Social Security. Clinton has said she will not offer a plan to fix Social
Security during the campaign. Obama has proposed raising the cap on taxable
earnings from its $97,000 level.
Obama's challenge is to simultaneously go after Clinton while drawing
caucusgoers to his campaign's theme of "Hope," Bystrom said.
"Obama has a much softer style and appears hesitant to go as negative," said
Bystrom, director of Iowa State's Carrie Chapman Catt Center for Women and
Politics. "He's professorial, and comes across as thoughtful."
But last week, Obama's campaign set up a series of press interviews to allow the
candidate to directly critique Clinton's new energy proposal.
"If she's willing to shift this quickly on the issue, we don't know whether she will
shift back when it gets hard," he told The Des Moines Register. He was referring
to Clinton's new support for ethanol, having opposed measures to support the
corn-based fuel additive in the past.
Clinton has said she opposed ethanol measures out of concern they would raise
fuel costs in New York, but supports them now that her state is planning ethanol
production plants.
Obama later rejected in a Register interview that he was trying to send a
message of toughness through the media, while softening his approach to
Iowans.
"You're not hearing me say one thing one place and something else elsewhere,"
he said.
Register staff writers Jason Clayworth and Tony Leys contributed to this article.
Reporter Thomas Beaumont can be reached at (515) 286-2532 or
tbeaumont@dmreg.com