Three camps join forces against Clinton
October 13, 2007 - 9:00 pm
In a show of solidarity among rivals, three Democratic presidential campaigns in Nevada have teamed up to criticize Hillary Clinton, saying the front-runner's refusal to take her name off the primary ballot in Michigan is an affront to Nevada.
Officials representing the campaigns of Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson on Friday called Clinton's action "a calculated maneuver" and "a slap in the face to the diverse voices of Nevada."
"It's time for Senator Clinton to honor her word to Nevada Democrats," states the letter signed by state Sen. Steven Horsford, who has endorsed Obama; Assemblyman Tick Segerblom, who leads Edwards' Nevada campaign; and Reynaldo Martinez, chairman of Richardson's campaign in Nevada.
Although the letter revolves around a promise all the major Democratic candidates made to Nevada, Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina that they would shun Michigan and Florida, it is perhaps more notable for bringing together three opponents, all trailing Clinton in state and national polls, to blast the New York senator.
Clinton's state campaign chairman, Clark County Commissioner Rory Reid, called the letter a political maneuver.
"I don't think it's realistic to suggest that Senator Clinton is not committed to this state, and I think it may be motivated by jealousy of what she's built here," Reid said.
"It's curious that all of these other campaigns are coming together to go after her. It says something about the position she's in and how she's become the obvious leader. People will read through this and see it for what it is."
Horsford, a Democratic National Committee member representing Nevada, said it was his idea to draft the letter because he was one of the people who convinced the committee to give Nevada a place in the early nominating process for the first time, and he didn't want to see the contest's primacy threatened by other states breaking the rules.
"This is the first time Nevada is playing such a significant role, and it's important that the other campaigns don't undermine our role in the process," Horsford said. "The Clinton campaign made a pledge to Nevada voters that they would respect the rules and process set by the DNC. I believe they have violated the spirit of that pledge."
Horsford said it was not just a technicality but an issue of candidates keeping their promises.
By signing the pledge, the Democratic candidates agreed not to "campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina."
Those are the four states that the DNC scheduled to hold primaries or caucuses in January. Their early position gives those smaller states the ability to have disproportionate clout in choosing the party's nominee. Iowa and New Hampshire have traditionally held early contests; the DNC inserted Nevada and South Carolina to inject ethnic and geographic diversity.
However, other states, wanting their own voices heard early, have scheduled non-DNC-approved early primaries: Michigan on Jan. 15, and Florida on Jan. 29.
Earlier this week, all of the candidates except Clinton and Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., elected to take their names off the Michigan ballot to deprive the primary -- or a Clinton win -- of significance.
Campaign officials said it wasn't possible to take the same action in the Florida primary.
The four-state early process is meant to level the playing field because candidates with less money still can work their way across small states, interacting with voters and organizing a grass-roots network.
"These are the states where ideas count and it's not about big money," said Edwards spokesman Adam Bozzi. "When the candidates decided to remove their names from the Michigan ballot, they were taking the next step. To not remove your name seems to be trying to hedge your bets and have it both ways. We're making it clear that the states abiding by the rules are going to be the states where the campaign plays out."
Parsing what the pledge does and doesn't allow has become frustratingly impossible for the campaigns as the four states that drafted it have said they won't make determinations about what it covers.