The dog days spark political pairings

Chuck Todd Chief White House correspondent and political director • Profile

WASHINGTON - With two more debates in the rear view mirror this week, it's clear that we've entered a new phase of the campaign where candidates start making allegiances either consciously or sub-consciously. We've seen numerous examples just in the last few days, most prominently at the AFL-CIO debate, but on the Republican side as well.

At Tuesday's AFL-CIO forum (which turned into a debate), the most striking example of this new tribal phenomenon was Joe Biden's hits on both Barack Obama and John Edwards. It was as if Edwards became Patton with Hillary Clinton playing the role of Eisenhower. She kept her hands clean while Biden did the dirty work.

Biden, perhaps out of frustration or self-preservation for a future role in a Clinton administration, turned in a solid audition for the role of Clinton attack dog. He was unrelenting on Edwards. He relished beating him up, at least in part because he feels Edwards is taking away two of what he hoped would be his key constituencies — trial lawyers and labor.

As for Biden's attacks on Obama, he had help from another Washington colleague, Chris Dodd.

For the first time this debate season, Dodd was aggressive against a fellow Democrat. Now, in fairness, Dodd's folks took issue with my initial contention that he was carrying Clinton's water. After all, they contend, he's at 1 percent in the polls, he's going to take any opportunity to attack any of the folks he's chasing. But the fact is, he was and didn't lay a finger on the frontrunner.

For Clinton, the Biden/Dodd double team on Obama and Edwards was a welcome development. It allowed Clinton to stay above the fray. At points, she even egged Dodd on by name-dropping them on key legislation she was working on.

But if there's a downside, the fact that two creatures of the Washington establishment (Dodd and Biden) are taking Clinton's side does put a slight crimp in her argument that she'll bring change, assuming this is as big a change election as many of us think.

In fact, check out the attack Joe Trippi, one of the folks running Edwards' campaign, made last night when he complained the "whole Senate cloakroom" was on the attack.

Is an Obama/Edwards pairing next?
Now, if Clnton has found her secret surrogates in her current primary competitors, does that mean we're going to see Edwards and Obama somehow teaming up?

Maybe. But it will be a tenuous alliance, sort of like Germany and Japan in World War II (or for those offended by that analogy, think the U.S. and Soviet Union in WWII), where eventually, they'll have to turn on each other.

And then, of course, the two are completely distrustful of each other, both believing secretly the other is a phony on some of these issues, like fighting lobbyists.

Still, Edwards and Obama are going to have to profess to like each other publicly and support each other on many of their "change" proposals. Their alliance is going to be especially important in Iowa and New Hampshire, where neither candidate can count on sweeping the states without taking a significant portion of the other's support.

Conventional wisdom says Edwards and Obama will have an easier time winning over each other's supporters than picking off Clinton's. Why? If a Democrat has already decided to support someone other than Clinton, then the sale for another Clinton alternative will be much easier to make.

MORE FROM POLITICS

Politics Section Front

Report: Health bill would reduce senior care NYT: Obama eyes cost of Afghan decision   In visit to China, Obama walks a tightrope Obama, Medvedev see progress on nuke pact Clinton says Karzai ‘must do better’ Parties split on N.Y. trials of alleged terrorists Palin offers readers insight into '08 ups, downs Secretive front group battles health bill Chinese racist? Obama trip spurs talk Clinton ready to have coffee with Palin Politics Section Front   Add Politics headlines to your news reader: