That's what the That's what the New York Times suggests this morning in a piece the Clinton campaign is already rebutting: "The story quotes not a single Democrat – not even on background. Republicans are the only people quoted!" That's not exactly true -- the Times does quote Rep. Nancy Boyda, the first term Kansas Democrat who Republicans say is ripe for picking off if the Democratic presidential nominee is unpopular among conservatives. Boyda narrowly won her seat by four points last year in a district that supported President Bush by 60 percent in 2004. But Boyda doesn't criticize Clinton, she simply says the presidential race is "something I have no control over, quite honestly. They will demonize any Democrat who becomes the nominee. I just put my head down and work.” Nevertheless, there's no doubt that tying congressional Democrats to Hillary Clinton is already a favored GOP tactic. Yesterday the National Republican Senatorial Committee released this ad calling Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu and Clinton "two peas in a pod" when it comes to immigration "flip flops." It works especially well since both politicians are blond ladies. The ad morphs Clinton's face into Landrieu's.
Our own Tom Schaller took to the pages of The New Republic last week to rebut the claim that Hillary would act as a congressional spoiler. Schaller does quote some Democrats concerned about this possibility; of course, some of them are affiliated with rival campaigns. But he concludes that no presidential candidate has that much of an affect on down ticket races, and that Clinton might be able to turn her support among women into an asset that could help Democrats nationwide. I wonder if that's the NRSC is really trying to rebut that appeal in the above ad, with the two women's faces seen as one. It's sort of a dog whistle to male voter: Hey, if you hate that liberal feminist castrating pantsuit wearing Hillary, you better hate your lady Senator, too! She's just as bad! Really! --Dana Goldstein
