Mark is fun to read and he is snarky to everyone. but, since clinton has come out with some info on her 2nd quarter fundraising early - which I find odd - he has decided to take apart the meaning in the fundraising letter.
" Bottom line is that both campaigns will raise a great deal of money and that we will have all the resources we need to compete and win. Ultimately, this race will come down to the candidates themselves, their message and the quality of their campaigns. We feel very good about where the campaign stands, and our ability to win the primary and go toe-to-toe with any of the Republicans in the field."
Bottom line: The Democratic Party is not the Clinton Party anymore; if anything, it's the Howard Dean party. But Wolfson is right on points and style: I don't detect the same degree of nervousness among Clinton advisers I did when Barack Obama first entered the race.
Electability -- As Mark Penn likes to say, people always ask "can Hillary win?" but he has never had this asked of someone who is already winning. This week's national polls underscore that observation.
"According to the latest CNN, Newsweek and USA Today/Gallup polls, Hillary beats all of the leading GOP contenders head-to-head, and she has solidified double-digit leads in all of the national primary polls. She's also leading in 34 out of the 36 states with recent primary polls, including the early states. Voters say she's the candidate most likely to win the general election and the primary, and according to a June Washington Post/ABC poll, Hillary leads by nearly 50 points on the question of who has the best experience to be President. "
Mark Penn DOES like to say that. But she's not winning in Iowa, and the polls in South Carolina are equivocal. That Wolfson included this paragraph speaks to the fact that too many Democrats are worried that Clinton inevitably polarizes. We the press haven't made up our minds as to whether HRC MUST win Iowa or not.
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/