Clinton already runs in trouble because of the early-state pledge

A small week after Clinton joined the other Democratic candidates and signed that ridiculous pledge promising to not campaign in the "rogue states" of Michigan and Florida, she is already running into big trouble. The Politico's Ben Smith reported yesterday morning that Clinton had made an incursion in Florida:

This isn't violation of the letter of the agreement with Iowa and the other early states about not campaigning in Florida; that apparently doesn't kick in until the DNC's deadline runs out at the end of this month. Still, I haven't seen a lot of retail events in Florida from any of the campaigns, and Hillary has one this afternoon: "a discussion about her senior agenda at the Century Village West in Boca Raton."

Blasphemy! The Iowa press is up in arms about this. News that Clinton was already scheduling 5 fundraisers in Florida did not arrange matters, and this all led to a stunningly vitriolic article by David Yepsen, the uber-influential political columnist of the Des Moines Register. The negativity of the piece makes it a must-read. Yepsen starts: "One thing we learned during Bill Clinton’s presidency was to study and parse his words carefully. Apparently we’ll need to do that with his wife should she become president." Ouch. And Yepsen later concludes:

Mark Daley, her spokesman in Iowa, said “she is doing 5 fundraisers and a public meeting about seniors issues. This doesn’t violate the pledge as Florida is not in violation of the DNC rules at this time.” He initially said Sept 30 is the deadline for them to set their date but said later he wasn’t sure of the deadline. Ah. But the pledge she signed says nothing about deadlines or Sept. 30.
So will Iowans give her a pass just because the promise not to campaign there hasn’t technically kicked in because Florida’s technically not out of compliance? We’ll see. According to Smith, the other candidates aren’t campaigning in Florida. So they must read the rules differently. Most reasonable folks would look at what she signed, then look at five fundraisers and a round-table discussion and say “if it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck…." It’s also true most folks in Iowa believe your word is your bond, especially folks who came of age before everything was lawyered-up all the time. If you make a pledge, you keep it. You’re better off not making a promise than trying to wiggle around of what everyone thought you intended to do. Smart politicians don’t play word games with Iowans.

Notice the barely veiled threat of the column's last sentence. Campaigning in Florida has clearly become the gravest offense at this point. What is Law-and-Order's Arthur Branch (aka Fred Thompson) waiting for to call for the criminalization of such behavior? Maybe we should even bring back Kenneth Starr to protect Iowa's first-place on the primary calendar! Even the NH press is covering this, quoting a "very concerned" state senator.

More seriously, this could definitely mean trouble for the Clinton campaign. As I wrote previously, Clinton can still expect a significant bounce out of a Florida victory even without campaigning going on there. I asked, "By the time California and New York go to the polls, is it more likely that voters have in mind one-month-old results from smaller states like Iowa? Or is it more likely they remember the outcome of a primary that is technically a beauty contest, in one of the most populous states and only a week old?"

But if Clinton gives the impression she is threatening the privileged position of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, she could suffer in those four early states. A significantly poor showing in Iowa (which could very well happen if the likes of David Yepsen pounce at Clinton for breaking her pledge) would dramatically change the state of the game in New Hampshire and South Carolina, giving Obama and Edwards the space they need to move the race's completely static numbers.

The calendar chaos is continuing to influence the race in more ways than we thought possible.