Snip, snip: the Fed cuts 25 basis points, but signals that's it for now.

Hillary's new video, 'The Politics of Pile On:'

Clinton also received the endorsement of the labor group AFSCME with its 1.4 million membership nation wide.

No treat: Bush says SCHIP is a "trick" on the American public.

Durbin will oppose Mukasey for AG.

Time served: sentences were dished out in the Madrid bombing case. 21 were convicted, 7 acquitted. Two of those convicted received jail sentences of 43,000 years each, but Spanish law sets the maximum time served in prison at 40 years.

A bus bomb kills 50 in Russia.

Nothing to see here, comrade: also in Russia, the Putin government is curbing the number of poll watchers for the upcoming December 2 elections. Wonder why.

New McCain ad: "Guts"

Uh oh: new study shows bacon and beer causes cancer.

Amidst the talk last night of driver's licenses and UFOs in Roswell, Senator Clinton managed to frame what may be the biggest foreign policy question facing the 2008 nominees - Iran:

"I am not in favor of this rush for war, but I'm also not in favor of doing nothing. Iran is seeking nuclear weapons," Clinton said in defending her stance. "And the Iranian Revolutionary Guard is in the forefront of that, as they are in the sponsorship of terrorism."

Directly confronting her critics, the senator said, "So some may want a false choice between rushing to war, which is the way the Republicans sound -- it's not even a question of whether, it's a question of when and what weapons to use -- and doing nothing.

"I prefer vigorous diplomacy. And I happen to think economic sanctions are part of vigorous diplomacy."

Edwards and Obama have made the Kyl-Lieberman amendment their rally cry on this issue, and it gives them the cover they need in order to avoid formulating concrete positions on Iran. They hide behind wishy-washy concepts like saber rattling, and never neglect to throw out the 'neocon' talking point.

But Hillary's answer, albeit irresolute, is the honest one. Maintaining multiple options for dealing with a foreign threat is not only practical, but it greatly resembles this thing called diplomacy that Clinton's critics seem fond of citing. Her opponents are engaging in a phony debate, where the only options we have to leverage are annihilation or nothing. Either we attack Iran, or we turn a blind eye. This is disingenuous.

Clinton's team has hit back following last night, positioning the senator as the boldest candidate on the issues that matter. She should take this a step further and make her primary opponents choose - if they truly possess such clarity on the matter.

Governor Richardson proposed unconditional negotiations with Iran. Clinton should challenge Obama and Edwards on this, much like Mark Hemingway of The Corner proposed.

If labeling a terrorist organization as a terrorist organization is bad diplomacy, then what does good diplomacy look like? If we must talk directly to the Iranians, then what should we offer them?

Via Marc Ambinder, here's Mark Penn trying to spin Hillary's answer on the driver's licenses for illegal immigrants question:

A valiant attempt, and it's no wonder Republicans couldn't wait for the lights to dim on stage before piling on. Mitt Romney's team quickly released a fact sheet, Rudy issued a statement and even the RNC got in on it.

The fascinating thing about this is that Edwards and Obama were, to varying degrees, trying to catch Clinton all night. It finally came in the last 10 minutes, but from Tim Russert. As Tom noted, it's a good bet Tim is off Hillary's Christmas list.

Frank Luntz had 29 "angry" Democrats on the dials last night, and from what he heard and saw Obama came away the winner of the debate:

Couple of quick items from upcoming House races in Illinois:

Dave Parro reports the fur is already flying between Chris Lauzen and Jim Oberweis in the GOP primary in IL-14. Lauzen put the Kane County GOP Chairman on his campaign payroll at $5k per month and Oberweis is crying 'payola politics as usual.' But apparently Oberweis inquired how much it would take to bring the same person on his staff, and instead of offering a higher bid he decided to try and use the episode to score political points. Meanwhile, Geneva Mayor Kevin Burns, the other Republican in the primary, stands by watching the mud fly back and forth.

And up north in IL-8, Republican Steve Greenberg is calling on incumbent Melissa Bean to give back the $23,000 she's gotten in contributions from "radical liberal" Congressman Charlie Rangel.

"By keeping Rangel's donations, Melissa Bean is demonstrating solidarity with Rangel's desire to raise taxes and take more money out of the pockets of the individuals, families, and small business owners of her district," Greenberg said in a statement released today. "Melissa Bean has chosen her liberal big government, tax and spend friends, Nancy Pelosi, Charles Rangel, Moveon.org, etc., over the best interests of the individuals and families she is supposed to represent."

Before Greenberg gets to take on Bean, however, he faces a primary challenge from Ken Arnold and Kirk Morris.

Had enough debate talk? Ready for something a bit different? I give you Ron Paul on "The Tonight Show":

The revolution continues over in the Vlog, where you can watch highlights from last night's Democratic debate.

Karen Hughes is leaving the State Department.

This isn't really news, since Edwards is a favorite of the netroots, but the unscientific online poll at Daily Kos shows Edwards the clear winner last night:

Via Drudge, we see Hillary's camp is trying to pin the blame for Clinton's poor performance last night on Tim Russert:

CLINTON INNER-CIRCLE BLAME 'UNFAIR' MODERATOR TIM RUSSERT. 'HE BORDERED ON THE UNPROFESSIONAL,' TOP HILLARY ADVISER CHARGES. 'HE BROKE DEBATE RULES AND WAS BELLIGERENT'...

Please. Blaming Russert is not only ridiculous, it makes Hillary and her campaign look like a bunch of spoiled children. Why not say, "so we had one bad night out of a hundred" and leave it at that? Better yet, why say anything at all?

Up until now, the Clinton camp has been basking in near constant media praise for having run a "flawless campaign." But they hit one bit of turbulence and this is how they respond? Maybe they're not the smooth operators everyone thinks they are. Or maybe Clinton's performance last night polled so badly it spooked them into a panicked overreaction.

Not only is the honeymoon over for Eliot Spitzer, but nine months into his first term Mike Goodwin of the New York Daily News says it's already time to start looking ahead, and he has a suggestion about where to look:

Eliot Spitzer has fallen and he can't get up. With each passing day bringing fresh proof the job is over his head, we must start looking for our next governor.

Fortunately, we don't have to look far. The end of Michael Bloomberg's tenure at City Hall is Jan. 1, 2010, which begins the gubernatorial election year. Here's my point: Mayor Mike ought to get over his White House fantasy and set his sights on Albany for the next stop on his excellent adventure tour.

Here are today's top political and election stories:

"A Pitched Debate: Clinton Hears It From Her Rivals" (Adam Nagourney and Elisabeth Bumiller, New York Times) Was it John Edwards' attack on Hillary Clinton for her waffling answer on immigration policies? Was it Barack Obama's attack on Clinton for her "secrecy"? Was it Bill Richardson's ode to Clinton late into the night? Or was it Dennis Kucinich's claim that he had once seen a UFO? Whatever it was, last night's Democratic debate in Philadelphia was one for the books.

"Primary Rush Forces New Tack For Campaigns" (Mary Jacoby and T.W. Farnum, Wall Street Journal) The front-loaded primary calendar has forced campaigns to readjust traditional notions of where to spend fundraising dollars. For some, like Mitt Romney and Barack Obama, it means a heavy focus on Iowa; for others, like Rudy Giuliani, it means focusing on Florida.

"Meet Giuliani's New Brain on Foreign Policy" (Eli Lake, New York Sun) Derided by critics as just a collection of those dreaded "neocons," Giuliani's foreign-policy team wants to set the record straight, and that begins with its head, Charles Hill, the former executive assistant to Secretary of State Shultz.

"Huckabee Doubts Rudy Will Get Nod" (Sam Youngman, The Hill) Sen. Sam Brownback was never more sought-after than the moment he dropped out of the GOP race. He has met with Giuliani and rumors are flying that pro-life Brownback could endorse pro-choice Rudy. Such a move would "shock" Mike Huckabee, who would also benefit greatly from a Brownback endorsement.

"Presidential Hopefuls Try to 'Out-Yucca' One Another" (Steve Tetreault, Las Vegas Review-Journal) Maybe because it's a local issue a couple thousand miles out of mind from Philadelphia, but the Yucca Mountain controversy in Nevada didn't come up at last night's debate. But when the Democratic candidates are in Nevada, boy, is it on.

"McCain Caters to GOP Voters" (Stephen Dinan, Washington Times) That benign looking headline actually tops what is a very critical article examining John McCain's many changes on positions, otherwise known as flip-flopping.

"Mega Donors Prepare For '08 Battle" (Ben Smith, The Politico) Billionaires George Soros (for the Dems) and Sheldon Adelson (for the GOP) are determined to spend enough money next year to make 2004 look like a bake sale.

"Similarities to Clinton Land Obama in Tight Spot" (Scott Helman, Boston Globe) Maybe part of the reason Obama has yet to gain much traction going after Clinton is because there aren't many differences between the two.

"Giuliani: Illegals Are a Federal Problem" (Libby Quaid, Associated Press) A good way for Giuliani to parry jabs at his immigration record while mayor is to shift the onus of handling illegal immigration onto the federal government.

"In Chicago, Romney Warns of 'Hillary's House of Horrors'" (Abdon Pallasch, Chicago Sun-Times) Romney traveled to the Windy City and seemed to attack everyone from Clinton to Rudy. And if you're an Olympics fan, he promised to bring it to Chicago in 2016.

Get these and today's other election stories at RCP's Politics and Election page.

I had almost lost interest in the debate last night when Tim Russert asked Hillary Clinton about New York Governor Eliot Spitzer's proposal to give driver's licenses to illegal immigrants:

Hillary's answer was problematic not only as a matter of policy, but also for its slipperiness. After getting drilled by her two main rivals for the better part of an hour and a half for being a "doubletalker" (Edwards) and "secretive" (Obama), Clinton played right into those charges by trying to have it both ways. You could see from the stare she gave Russert when he re-asked the question she knew she'd been put in a spot, and she wasn't the least bit happy about it.

In general, Clinton took a pounding last night but did a competent job of defending herself. Chris Dodd hit her on electability, Obama took swipes at her on Social Security, but it was John Edwards who did the best, most direct job of framing the choice for Democratic voters. In particular, Edwards' critique of Hillary's trustworthiness was key. If you talk to people in Barack Obama's camp, they believe the issue of "trust" is one of the main fulcrums around which this race is going to turn - ultimately, in their opinion, away from Hillary and in favor of Barack.

But it was Edwards who reached out last night to try and grab the mantle as the candidate Democrats can trust - and he seemed to do it somewhat effectively. The reason the "trustworthiness" charge is so potentially potent is because it dovetails with - or cuts against, depending on your perspective - the argument for real change, which is what Democrats (and Republicans, for that matter) are yearning for this year.

Edwards' accusation is that Hillary is an entrenched part of a corrupt and broken system, and that you simply cannot trust her when she says she's an agent of change. That is a powerful message that probably rings true to many Democrats and arouses deep-seated suspicions about her. Furthermore, it makes her slogan - You can't have change without the "experience and leadership" - seem like another example of hollow Clintonian parsing and triangulation.

Again, this is the argument Obama should be making against Clinton, but Edwards was the one who took the lead. That doesn't mean it may not still benefit Obama in the end, but for the moment the anyone-but-Hillary portion of the Democratic party watching the debate last night found their candidate in John Edwards.

I'm a firm believer that debates matter very little as individual events. A single debate on a little-watched cable channel where nothing spectacular happened is simply not going to change the dynamics of a race overnight. That being said, last night's debate did perhaps offer the opening salvo in what will become a recurrent theme on the campaign trail that has the potential to alter the Democratic race in a significant way as Edwards and Obama hone in on the issue of Clinton's trustworthiness over the next 65 days.

Quinnipiac is out with a national '08 poll (October 23 - 29, 678 GOP LV, MoE +/- 3.8%, 742 Dem LV, MoE +/- 3.6 percent%). On the Democratic side, Clinton's lead over Obama has bulged to a more than two-to-one advantage:

Democrats
Clinton 47 (+11 vs last poll August 15)
Obama 21 (nc)
Edwards 12 (+3)
Richardson 3 (nc)
Undecided 11 (+1)

Overall, Clinton leads in the RCP Average by 24.0%

For the Republicans, Giuliani remains steady atop the pack:

Republicans
Giuliani 27 (-1 vs last poll August 15)
Thompson 17 (+5)
Romney 14 (-1)
McCain 13 (+2)
Huckabee 6 (+4)
Undecided 15 (-1)

Overall, Rudy leads by 11 points in the RCP Average.

General Election Match Ups
Clinton 43 - Giuliani 45
Clinton 44 - McCain 44
Clinton 46 - Thompson 41
Clinton 48 - Romney 38

Obama 43 - Giuliani 42
Obama 43 - McCain 43
Obama 45 - Thompson 37
Obama 46 - Romney 36

Edwards 41 - Giuliani 44
Edwards 42 - McCain 42
Edwards 46 - Thompson 36
Edwards 47 - Romney 34

Favorable Ratings
Obama 50/26 (+24)
McCain 49/25 (+24)
Edwards 46/29 (+17)
Giuliani 47/32 (+15)
Thompson 31/21 (+10)
Romney 28/25 (+3)
Huckabee 15/13 (+2)
Clinton 46/46 (0)
Pelosi 22/35 (-13)
Reid 9/22 (-13)

Other notables: Democrats hold a 7 point edge in the generic presidential ballot (44-37), down from a 12-point lead in August. 52% of Democrats said they were "somewhat" or "very" likely to change their mind about who they might for. Among Republicans, that number was 67%.

President Bush's approval rating is at 35%, up six points since August, while Congress' job approval rating is only 21%, one point better than it was 10 weeks ago. However, 58% say Bush's low approval rating will make it more difficult for Republicans to win the White House next year, while only 25% say the low job rating of the Democratic controlled Congress will make it more difficult for a Democrat to win the Presidential race.

It may seem overdone to find long-term significance in an event as ephemeral as a pre-primary debate - especially when there's another one in a little over two weeks. But two things emerged last night that have the potential over time to change the contours of the race.

The first was the emergence of John Edwards as a credible alternative to the two front-runners. One doesn't have to agree with his eloquent brand of outsider populism to understand that there is a vote in the Democratic primaries for it and that in a year of alienation, it has the potential to be considerable. Barack Obama is a credible alternative, albeit still a work in progress, but he's not a traditional liberal Democrat. Ironically, the continued viability of three candidates helps Hillary by splitting the anti-Clinton vote - though you still need 50% of the delegates to win, of course.

The second was Hillary's bad performance. Everyone has off days but this one was special, in that it revealed not a gaffe, which can be explained away, but a potential character flaw. "Wafflers" don't do well in presidential politics -- not only because voters don't like panderers -- but also because a waffler is perceived as someone not tough or honest enough for the presidency. One only has to remember some key ads from past presidential races - Nixon's windmill ad against McGovern or Dukakis's tumbler ad against Gephardt - to realize that the charge is a hard one to shake. It's going to be especially hard for Hillary because it plays into negative gender stereotypes, as unfair as they are. And, it cuts into one of her greatest assets - her intelligence - because she is now beginning to appear to be "too clever by half."

The press will run with this story for the next two weeks so Obama and Edwards don't have to worry about appearing too negative. In two weeks, in the next debate, we'll begin to see how both developments from last night have taken hold.

To read Steven Stark's complete "Presidential Tote Board" blog, go to www.thephoenix.com/toteboard/

The blogosphere is buzzing over last night's Democratic presidential debate, but Nancy Pelosi and Michael Mukasey are sharing the headlines this morning over at RealClearBlogs:

Dissecting Drexel: Who won the Democratic presidential debate?

Mukasey's Question: Is waterboarding actually torture?

Pill-osi: Is Nancy Pelosi's Congress at war over everything?

When a member of Congress announces his or her retirement, especially in a contentious district, the incumbent party often faces a burden in avoiding a contentious primary, supporting a first-time candidate financially and reestablishing the good will the incumbent brought.

In Ohio's 15th District, where Rep. Deborah Pryce announced her retirement in August, Republicans face an even more basic challenge: Finding a candidate to begin with. The GOP has thus far failed to recruit any serious candidate, though the NRCC maintains it is a top priority. "We will have an A-list candidate sooner rather than later," NRCC press secretary Ken Spain told the Columbus Dispatch more than a month ago.

Strong candidates including former Attorney General Jim Petro, former Columbus Mayor Greg Lashutka, state Rep. Jim Hughes and State Sen. Steve Stivers have all passed on the opportunity. Only Aaron Wheeler, a pastor at Mountaintop Missionary Baptist Church, has declared on the GOP side.

Democrats will again back Franklin County Commissioner Mary Jo Kilroy, who lost to Pryce by less than one half of one percent -- just over 1000 votes -- in 2006. Kilroy has already raised more than $425,000 this year, and maintains $380,000 cash on hand, albeit with $62,000 in debt. This morning, she got more good news when EMILY's List, a powerful Washington-based group dedicated to electing pro-choice women to Congress, announced they would back her campaign.

Kilroy raised more than $2.7 million in 2006, and with EMILY's List's backing, she can expect similarly strong financial support this year.

President Bush won the district by fewer than 2500 votes, out of more than 300,000 cast, making the district one of the most competitive in the nation. But all that may not matter if Kilroy finds herself with little more than token opposition come November.

Stan Greenberg, Al Quinlan and James Carville lay out the good news for Democrats in their latest survey before delivering a warning to the party and its presidential candidates:

For all that, Democrats have yet not found their voice as agents of change, except perhaps on Iraq, and risk falling short of their greatest aspirations. [snip]

Democratic candidates for president and Congress are polling at 51 to 53 percent in the
various races, but if 2008 is to bring a tidal wave, Democrats and progressives must become more fully the voice of what is wrong with these times. It is not enough to be anti-Iraq and
anti-Bush. The conservative attack machine will soon launch nuclear war against the Democrats' nominee when he or she emerges, and a lot of the discontent in the country could
fragment and push voters to third-parties and some even back to the Republicans, particularly if
progressives fail to tackle key grievances, like immigration and taxes. Seats and states that
Democrats now covet could be lost without a clearer articulation of the Democrats' critique of
the times and their willingness to be agents of change.[all emphasis in the original]

The "change agent" argument would seem to fit Obama's greatest potential strength, but so far it's a strength that hasn't been realized, at least in most of the poll data we've seen.

Like most of the country, President Bush isn't too happy with Congress these days.

Iran denied supplying terrorists in Iraq with weapons to kill U.S. soldiers.

Congress extended the moratorium on taxing Internet access another seven years.

Pretty much every Democratic candidate opposes Judge Mike Mukasey's confirmation.

Has Barack Obama flip-flopped on Social Security?

Hillary Clinton tries to preempt her opponents before tonight's debate, while aide Mark Penn sent out the obligatory memo.

For that matter, Joe Biden is trying to do a little preempting of his own.

Fred Thompson nabs the endorsement of conservative Calif. state Sen. Tom McClintock, who must have seen the Human Events' poll giving Fred 23% and knew it was all but over.

"I seriously believe we have to start asking questions about his mental health," said Dennis Kucinich today about the president. Nice.

Actor/activist Ron Silver has a platform proposal for 2008. Any takers?

Jeff Simpson has a point about this year's World Series of Poker:

This year's winner, Jerry Yang, a Laotian-American from California, was way more likable than the obnoxious Gold, but the unassuming therapist found a way to annoy me during his final table triumph.

Yang, it seems, is a devout Christian. Good for him.

But there's something unseemly about a gambler, in the middle of a gambling event, beseeching God for help.

Among Yang's televised remarks at the final table were: "Let people see a miracle "; "Thank you Lord, Thank you God "; "Lord, you know you have a purpose for me "; and "I will glorify your name."

During one particularly tense hand, after all the chips had been pushed into the middle but a couple of cards had yet to be dealt, Yang asked for help.

"Father, in the name of Jesus Christ, let me win this one," he murmured.

Maybe it's me, but it just seems wrong to be asking God to deliver a card.

Amen to that.

Following Barack Obama, who said he would vote against Mukasey, and John Edwards, here's Clinton's statement on why she opposes the attorney general nominee:

We need an Attorney General who has the strength to challenge this Administration when it is wrong, who is committed to reestablishing the independence of the Department of Justice and to restoring respect for the Constitution and the rule of law. I am deeply troubled by Judge Mukasey's continued unwillingness to clearly state his views on torture and unchecked Executive power.

The Attorney General is the chief defender of the rule of law in our country. After Alberto Gonzales's troubled tenure, we cannot send a signal that the next Attorney General in any way condones torture or believes that the President is unconstrained by law. When we leave any doubt about our nation's policy on torture, we send a terrible message to the rest of the world. Judge Mukasey has been given ample opportunity -- both at his confirmation hearings and in his subsequent submission to the Judiciary Committee -- to clarify his answers and categorically oppose the unacceptable interrogation techniques employed by this Administration. His failure to do so leaves me no choice but to oppose his nomination.

We need to restore the nation's confidence in the Department of Justice. The Department must once again defend our Constitution and the rule of law without regard to ideology and partisanship. And we need to protect the country from terrorism while also respecting Americans' civil liberties.

Since Chris Dodd and Bill Richardson also oppose Mukasey's confirmation, I guess that takes one issue off the table for tonight's debate.

Right before filing for the New Hampshire primary today, Bill Richardson called on his fellow Democrats to stop the negative campaigning:

"You see how some of the candidates in our own party are starting to get negative," Richardson said. "We're not going to do it. We're going to talk about the issues."

"To all the Democratic candidates, let's stay positive," Richardson said. "Let's get rid of all this negative stuff that I’m seeing."

Which is all very noble, but also just a set-up to ... attack his rivals:

Richardson then singled out Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, and former Sen. John Edwards, D-North Carolina, for their critical remarks of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-New York.

"I've become very concerned about the negative tone of the campaign," he said. "I think that Senators Obama and Edwards should concentrate on the issues and not on attacking Sen. Clinton."

"The differences on the issues should be highlighted, but personal attacks I believe should not take place," he said.

And who do you think Richardson is talking about in this ad?

NRO's Jim Geraghty is having some fun at Chris Dodd's expense.

SurveyUSA released head-to-head match ups in New York showing Hillary Clinton crushing the GOP field, including a 34-point whupping of Rudy Giuliani.

Obama and Clinton are like two dance partners - one seemingly can't make a move without the other doing the same. That's ultimately good news for John Edwards -- who has a chance to make a break between the two -- but this week, Clinton and Obama feature similar ads focusing on Social Security:

Obama's ad effort this week is better than his "America's Back" last week, in that it dispenses with platitudes and offers some specifics on his plans to fix the system. But Hillary still offers the better ad. It's geared at a specific constituency that votes -- the elderly -- while Obama seems to be talking to baby boomers, who probably aren't that worried about their benefits yet. The Obama campaign also continues its habit of making its candidate the centerpiece of every ad -- Obama talks to the voters! -- which makes it hard sometimes to ratchet up the emotion.

The bottom line is that Hillary's ad makes an emotional link to voters. Obama offers them a "hard truth:" He won't put his finger to the wind and refuse to make the hard choices on a difficult issue. The problem is that voters want you both to listen to them and make the hard choices. In these ads, Hillary is the listener; Barack is the truth-teller. If I were old and worried about the loss of my benefits, I know the candidate I'd support.

To read Steven Stark's complete "Presidential Tote Board" blog, go to www.thephoenix.com/toteboard/

Sen. Judd Gregg endorsing Mitt Romney yesterday:

More videos in the Vlog.

Here are today's top political and election stories:

"The Democratic Target in Tuesday's Debate" (Jeff Zeleny, New York Times) With the Democratic candidates set to debate tonight, yesterday's University of Iowa poll showed Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in a virtual tie. Will we see sparks fly as in the last Republican debate?

"Fred Thompson's Southern Strategy" (Amy Schatz, Wall Street Journal) He's been battered by the press in early primary states like New Hampshire and Iowa, but Fred Thompson is following his own game plan and it starts in South Carolina.

"Giuliani Still Working at Firm He Promised to Leave" (John Solomon, Washington Post) Having said he would leave his security consulting firm earlier this year, Rudy Giuliani continues to work part time, perhaps giving his rivals political ammunition.

"Hillary Backed Lab of Donor" (Jim McElhatton, Washington Times) Two days after Dr. James Watson, co-founder of the DNA helix, donated money to Hillary Clinton's campaign, a Senate committee report showed that Clinton and Sen. Chuck Schumer earmarked $900,000 to Watson's lab. Watson has since had to retire from his lab following controversial comments he made on race.

"Romney Scores Big Win With Gregg Endorsement" (Klaus Marre and Sam Youngman, The Hill) Hanging on to a 6-point lead in New Hampshire over Giuliani in the RCP Average, Romney scored a major win with the endorsement of Sen. Judd Gregg.

"Memories of Obama in New York Differ" (Janny Scott, New York Times) As a young college graduate in New York, Barack Obama wrote about how those early years helped shaped the man he would become. Some, however, say Obama took a few literary licenses in telling his story.

"Rising in Polls, Huckabee Could Be GOP's Dark Horse in 2008" (Nicholas Wapshott, New York Sun) A recent Iowa poll has put Mike Huckabee in a statistical tie with Rudy Giuliani, but success comes with criticism and the former Arkansas governor is learning what it means to be contender.

"Romney: U.S. at Critical Juncture; Experience Key" (John Distaso, New Hampshire Union-Leader) In a wide-ranging inteview, Romney worries that the United States is at an "absolutely critical time" in its history.

"Iowans Grill Obama Over His Position on Gay Marriage" (Jason Clayworth, Des Moines Register) Beset with criticism from gay rights groups for inviting Donnie McClurkin to sing at a campaign event, Obama is also contending with criticism from younger voters angry with his opposition to gay marriage.

"Libertarian Paul Wins Young Minds" (Ben Adler, The Politico) Obama isn't the only candidate with a large youth following.

Get these and today's other election stories at RCP's Politics and Election Page.

Believe it or not, tonight marks one of the final debates the Democrats will have before Iowa in only two months. And. the press is playing up tonight's MSNBC encounter as the debut of the "new Obama" -- building expectations that he will finally go after Hillary.

But the question of whether Obama and Clinton clash is only a sideshow to the real question this debate and the next one in a little over two weeks will begin to decide for the Democrats. What these contests are really about is whether it's Obama or Edwards who becomes the candidate who survives the first two tests in Iowa and New Hampshire to take Clinton on in the later primaries as the "anti-Hillary."

As such, both candidates should be aiming tonight's performances at a very small audience -- Iowa caucus voters -- because if either candidate finishes third in that caucus, his campaign is as good as over. That's true even for Obama, despite all his millions.

With that in mind, here's what each has to do tonight:

Check out your Tuesday morning headlines over at RealClearBlogs:

Flip Flop Iraq: Will the Democrats change their tune on Iraq?

Obama's Basher: Is Sen. Obama campaigning with an anti-gay preacher?

Rudycare: Rudy Giuliani says socialized medicine would've been the death of him. Is he right?

Ron Paul launched two TV ads in New Hampshire today:

"Catching On":

"Troops and Deficit":

A suicide bomber killed at least 32 people outside a police station north of Baghdad.

The Supreme Court agreed to review some elements of the Exxon Valdez oil spill of 1989.

Youth vote rising: Chris Cillizza is co-moderating the MySpace/MTV presidential dialogue with Barack Obama in Cedar Rapids. (Stray thought: When was the last time MTV did anything concerning music?) The Caucus has the write-up.

More Obama: Ben Smith notices how Obama referred to the McClurkin affair as having happened a "while back." The singer-preacher sang at an Obama event yesterday.

"Senator Clinton's road to the middle class takes a major detour right through the deep canyon of corporate lobbyists and the hidden bidding of K Street in Washington ... And history tells us that when that bus stops there, it is the middle class that loses." John Edwards likes metaphors.

"I was early then, and now I'll be often." Fred Thompson reassures New Hampshire voters.

It's on. The CNN/YouTube scheduled for Nov. 28 will feature all eight GOP candidates.

Like a good libertarian, Ron Paul is good for business.

The money is beginning to flow for Mike Huckabee, despite the efforts by some (cough-ClubforGrowth-cough) to cast him as a fiscal liberal.

Sen. Judd Gregg, dean of the New Hampshire congressional delegation, will endorse Mitt Romney today at the state capitol, the Union Leader reports this morning. Gregg will join Romney before the former governor treks across the street to file papers to officially become a candidate on the New Hampshire ballot. A top Gregg adviser, Tom Rath, was an early Romney backer.

Gregg's endorsement means two of the Granite State's four members of Congress have chosen a candidate. Freshman Democratic Rep. Paul Hodes threw his support behind Barack Obama in July. Spokespeople for Democratic Rep. Carol Shea-Porter and Republican Sen. John Sununu were not immediately available to answer questions about whether their bosses would endorse.

Former Gov. Jeanne Shaheen, who is running against Sununu in 2008, is not backing a candidate, though her husband Bill is supporting Hillary Clinton. And Gov. John Lynch, also a Democrat, has remained neutral thus far.

No one from the Iowa delegation has publicly picked a candidate, though several South Carolinians have endorsed. Sen. Jim DeMint is on Romney's team, while Sen. Lindsey Graham is backing John McCain. Rep. Gresham Barrett is on board with former Sen. Fred Thompson.

Commenting on the new University of Iowa poll, the Weekly Standard's "Richelieu" makes a nice point:

The big news in the Iowa poll is a statistical tie between Hillary Rodham Clinton at 29 percent and Barack Obama at 27 percent. The same wide-sample discount mentioned above applies to these Democratic numbers as well, but the fact is Hillary has nothing like a lock on Iowa. Nonetheless, the national media continue to crown HRC as the nominee - which is not so bad for Obama, because all this Hillary hype now merely cranks the guillotine blade higher and higher into the air should she lose Iowa. That would open the windows of Heaven to another great flood. In this new poll, it looks as if some of Edwards's support is melting off to Obama. I've mentioned this before, but it's worth saying again. If the combined Edwards/Richardson/Biden vote - 32 percent in this poll - declines in the final stretch to, say, 21 percent, where does that lost 11 percent of the caucus vote go? I think it breaks two to one or better to Obama. And if that's correct, this poll approximately would read: HRC 32 percent, Obama 35 percent.

I would only quibble with the "two to one" argument, which, if you're an Obama fan, might be wishful thinking. The anti-Hillary logic behind Richelieu's prediction there, while sound, might not hold up on caucus day. The voters who are currently in the Edwards/Richardson/Biden camp I wouldn't exactly call a unified bunch, as there's much which separates an Edwards supporter from a Biden/Richardson supporter. In other words, the urge to win the White House ("electability") might prove just strong enough to trump the "Anyone But Hillary" card.

Still, as Richelieu says, the big story from the UofI poll is that there's plenty of game left to play.

As Reid Wilson noted this morning, Tom Tancredo says he will leave Congress at the end of 2008. As the Rocky Mountain News reported:

The decision is not a surprise, considering Tancredo's repeated complaints that his presidential run was taking a heavy toll on him and his family. But it is sure to set off a mad succession scramble in his solidly conservative, suburban Denver district.

Tancredo parlayed a back-bench seat in Congress into a national megaphone to oppose illegal immigration, denounce a so-called "cult of multiculturalism" and warn about a "clash of civilizations" between radical Islam and Western civilizations.

Those issues have been the centerpiece of Tancredo's bid for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008, although he has yet to break out of single digits in most polls. That campaign continues, with the first votes scheduled in the Iowa precinct caucuses in January.

Until now, Tancredo has tried to put off any talk of what he would do if his White House bid fell flat. But over the summer, he began hinting that he had his eyes on a 2010 contest against Sen. Ken Salazar, a Democrat he sees as his polar opposite on the immigration issue.

Rudy talks healthcare in his new radio ad for New Hampshire, which the campaign launched today:

More ads and political videos in the Vlog.

The University of Iowa Hawkeye poll is out today showing Mitt Romney with a commanding lead and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in a virtual tie.

Republicans:
Romney 36 (+9 vs. Aug. 5 poll)
Giuliani 13 (+2)
Huckabee 13 (+10)
Thompson 11 (+8)
McCain 6 (+3)

In the RCP Average, Romney has a 14-pt lead over Thompson (28.2% to 14.2%).

Democrats:
Clinton 29 (+2 vs. Aug. 5 poll)
Obama 27 (+5)
Edwards 20 (-2)
Richardson 7 (-2)
Biden 5 (na)

In the RCP Average, Clinton has a 6.5-pt lead over Obama (29.8% to 23.3%).

With Iowa Democrats joining their Republicans peers yesterday in agreeing to a Jan. 3 caucus date, the primary calendar is beginning to come into focus:

Jan. 3: Iowa Caucuses
Jan. 5: Wyoming GOP Caucus
Jan. 8: New Hampshire Primaries (subject to change)
Jan. 15: Michigan Primaries (Dems have pledged not to campaign in Mich. and all but Clinton and Dodd have taken their names off the ballot).
Jan. 19: Nevada Caucuses; South Carolina Republican Primary
Jan. 26 or 29: South Carolina Democratic Primary
Jan. 29: Florida Primaries
Feb. 1: Maine Republican Primary
Feb. 5: Super Tuesday
(CNN)

Compassionate conservative or "pro-life, pro-gun liberal"? Mike Huckabee under the microscope. (Ralph Hallow, Washington Times)

Is the fact that the health-care industry is giving more to Democrats this cycle a sign of shifting ideological views, or just a smart investment? (Raymond Hernandez and Robert Pear, New York Times) But it does make John Edwards' recent assault on drug ads a little more interesting. (Kate Davidson, Concord Monitor)

When you don't have much cash, John McCain is learning that planning a comeback is hard to do. Do you put all your chips in New Hampshire or do you divide and play Iowa as well? (Jonathan Martin, The Politico)

Terrorism or Islamic terrorism? That appears to be the divide between the GOP and Democratic rhetoric. (Elizabeth Holmes, Wall Street Journal)

Rudy Giuliani needles Hillary Clinton for her attack on "cowboy diplomacy." (Philip Elliot, Associated Press)

According to a new study, Clinton is the most talked about candidate in the news, as well as the most criticized. (Reuters)

"We're here and we're glad we're here." Donnie McClurkin to a cheering Obama crowd in South Carolina. (Jim Davenport, Associated Press)

Meanwhile, the candidate himself was talking about the need for the U.S. to show restraint in its execution of foreign policy. (Thomas Beaumont, Des Moines Register)

"GOP Candidates Run Hard to the Right." (Steven Thomma, McClatchy Newspapers)

Close encounters: Bill Richardson fields a question on the "secrecy" surrounding Roswell, N.M., and the 1947 "incident." (Wayne Slater, Dallas Morning News)

And for your daily dose of Ron Paul "Revolution" News: Is San Francisco Paul territory? (Scott Martelle, Los Angeles Times)

Get these and today's other elections stories at RCP's Politics and Election page.