Clinton: KELO Video, Argus Endorsement

KELO gets a great shot of the Madville Times family breakfast, as well as of Senator Clinton:

[Click here for the video -- I would embed it, but I don't like the autostart.]

The yawning boy was hilarious. And props overall to KELO rookie reporter (and former Watertown debater!) Erica Johnson for some darn fine video-journalism!

Rhubarb pie must be the decider for that Sioux Falls paper, which has this morning endorsed "long shot" Senator Clinton in the primary vote. The Sioux Falls editorial board makes up some reasons to vote for Clinton that don't distinguish her from Obama at all:

• "Measured against her opponent, Clinton is philosophically more moderate."
  Baloney. Clinton and Obama's policies are mostly identical. The Clintons' "moderation" is never a product of philosophy, only of pragmatic political ambition. Obama is as capable of sitting down with opponents and finding common ground as -- if not more so than -- Clinton.
• "Clinton's energy policy is forward thinking and wise. She advocates a broad federal research initiative to help solve our looming oil crisis. It's a plan that would join university researchers, private industry and individual inventors behind a common goal."
  Obama advocates a doubling of funding for research into biomass, solar, and wind resources.
• "Is ethanol part of the answer? Clinton believes it is but not necessarily corn ethanol.That is not precisely the answer South Dakota wants to hear."
  O.K., then how about Obama's answer: along with boosting cellulosic ethanol, Obama will provide incentive for more locally-owned ethanol refineries and increase the renewable fuel standard (that means more corn-based ethanol).
• "Clinton has demonstrated a real commitment to Native American issues...."
  Again, how does this distinguish Clinton from Obama? Obama is on record as a fighter for Indian rights, enough to win the endorsement of fifty tribal leaders and all Indian superdelegates who had announced as of May 23.

Failing to make any real policy distinction between Clinton and Obama, maybe that Sioux Falls paper is just thanking Clinton for sending the paper's web hits to the moon last week with the RFK assassination comment video.

Or maybe the Sioux Falls editors are looking at this race from a purely South Dakota perspective. Who's giving South Dakota the love? While Obama took yesterday off, Clinton Hit Madison, Huron, and Watertown. Obama talked with tribal leaders privately before his Sioux Falls rally; as that Sioux Falls paper points out, Clinton "will have visited several South Dakota reservations before the race is over." Obama's surrogates have been making the rounds, but Clinton's most famous surrogate, ex-President Bill, is hitting 12 South Dakota towns between now and Monday.

Back in February, I staked my claim to Obama as the South Dakota candidate based on his small-state politics:

I'll note that Obama is the one campaigning as if all 50 states, including us rural states, make a difference, getting an early (and as we see now, successful) jump on campaigning in relatively small North Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, and Idaho while Clinton plays big-city, big-state politics and will start pouring resources into the rest of the country only now that it looks like she needs us. [CAH, "Obama -- The South Dakota Candidate?" Madville Times, 2008.02.10]

Clinton appears to have finally picked up on the small-state lesson, now that she needs us. In the big picture, the Clinton effort in South Dakota may be too little too late. But at the South Dakota level, for my neighbors who are still deciding, the Clintons are putting on one heck of a show. For South Dakotans who ask, "Which candidate is taking the time to come to my town and look me in the eye?" Clinton is winning hands down.

Obama is spending the weekend here. For the first time in a long while, he's playing catch up to Clinton. Let's see that hustle again, Senator Obama!

* * *

Update 11:38 CDT: Back from a morning stroll with Madville Times, Jr., I see South Dakota Moderate finds that Sioux Falls paper's endorsement of Clinton similarly puzzling. SDM points to an article from that same paper to make our point for us: on South Dakota policy issues, that Sioux Falls paper identifies no clear difference on which to base its endorsement.