<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.observer.com" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>NY Observer &gt; Howard Wolfson</title>
 <link>http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/24432/feed</link>
 <description>Articles from Observer.com</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>Now Fox News Really Has the Inside Track on Hillary Clinton!</title>
 <link>http://www.observer.com/2008/media/newly-minted-fox-news-contributor-howard-wolfson-discusses-hillarys-vp-prospects-hannity-</link>
 <description><![CDATA[<!--paging_filter--><p>For the inside scoop on Hillary Clinton, go directly to Fox News! </p>
<p><span>Last night, Howard Wolfson, the erstwhile aide to Senator Hillary Clinton, made an appearance on <em>Hannity &amp; Colmes</em>, as part of his new gig as a regular <a href="http://www.crainsnewyork.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080708/FREE/739442649/-1/rss01&amp;rssfeed=rss01">contributor</a> to Fox News. </span>
<p><span>Sean Hannity didn’t waste much time before he started asking Mr. Wolfson to report on his former boss. </span></p>
<p><span>“Let me start with this simple basic question,” said Mr. Hannity. “I think everybody wants to know, the rumors have been swirling. Has Hillary been asked to participate in the process, the vetting process, for VP?” </span></p>
<p><span>&quot;Not as far as I know,&quot; said Mr. Wolfson.</span></p>
<p><span>Mr. Wolfson was pointedly not wearing a funny-looking <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/05/viva-la-sweater-howard-w_n_85135.html">sweater</a>.  </span> <span class='read-more'><a href="http://www.observer.com/2008/media/newly-minted-fox-news-contributor-howard-wolfson-discusses-hillarys-vp-prospects-hannity-">&nbsp;read&nbsp;more&nbsp;&raquo;</a></span></p>]]></description>
 <comments>http://www.observer.com/2008/media/newly-minted-fox-news-contributor-howard-wolfson-discusses-hillarys-vp-prospects-hannity-#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/channel/media">Media</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/50760">Fox News</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/24432">Howard Wolfson</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/25248">Sean Hannity</category>
 <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2008 11:21:36 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Felix Gillette</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">71721 at http://www.observer.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Clinton Campaign Says She Leads Popular Vote</title>
 <link>http://www.observer.com/2008/clinton-campaign-says-she-leads-popular-vote</link>
 <description><![CDATA[<!--paging_filter--><p>On a conference call today, the Clinton campaign argued that after her victory in West Virginia–and counting the votes in Florida and Michigan–Hillary Clinton now leads in the popular vote. &quot;Hillary Clinton has now moved ahead in the popular vote,&quot; said campaign chairman Terry McAuliffe. (In that calculation, the Clinton campaign is not awarding any Michigan votes for the &quot;uncommitted&quot; choice to Obama, who was not on the ballot there.) <span class='read-more'><a href="http://www.observer.com/2008/clinton-campaign-says-she-leads-popular-vote">&nbsp;read&nbsp;more&nbsp;&raquo;</a></span></p>]]></description>
 <comments>http://www.observer.com/2008/clinton-campaign-says-she-leads-popular-vote#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/channel/politics">Politics</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/people/barack-obama">Barack Obama</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/people/hillary-clinton">Hillary Clinton</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/24432">Howard Wolfson</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 14 May 2008 14:46:20 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Jason Horowitz</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">69228 at http://www.observer.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>&#039;No Discussions&#039; About Dropping Out</title>
 <link>http://www.observer.com/2008/no-discussions-about-dropping-out</link>
 <description><![CDATA[<!--paging_filter--><p>Asked point-blank by the <i>Post</i>'s Anne Kornblut if there had been any discussions about Hillary Clinton dropping out of the race, Howard Wolfson said, "No -- no discussions."
<p>He then did his best to put yesterday's results in a positive light.</p>
<p>"These were two states that Senator Obama predicted victory in," he said, and, "These were two states we were supposed to lose. We won one of them."</p>
<p>"It was Senator Clinton making up ground and Senator Obama losing ground," he said.</p>
<p>Difficult. <span class='read-more'><a href="http://www.observer.com/2008/no-discussions-about-dropping-out">&nbsp;read&nbsp;more&nbsp;&raquo;</a></span></p>]]></description>
 <comments>http://www.observer.com/2008/no-discussions-about-dropping-out#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/channel/politics">Politics</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/people/barack-obama">Barack Obama</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/people/hillary-clinton">Hillary Clinton</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/24432">Howard Wolfson</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2008 10:53:39 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Jason Horowitz</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">68900 at http://www.observer.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Wolfson on Blue-Collar Voters, The Superdelegate Meeting, Self-Loans</title>
 <link>http://www.observer.com/2008/wolfson-makes-blue-collar-argument-confirms-superdelegate-meeting</link>
 <description><![CDATA[<!--paging_filter--><p>Howard Wolfson is arguing that Hillary Clinton "would be the stronger nominee against John McCain" because she had proven an ability to attract blue-collar Democrats and win swing states. "Senator Obama, on the other hand, has not yet proven that he can win key swing states, has not proven that he can win blue-collar voters," Wolfson said. He called that "the crux of the argument" the campaign would make going forward.
<p>When asked in a question-and-answer period whether media declarations of Clinton's electoral demise would hurt their effort to court superdelegates, Wolfson said, "Obviously superdelegates watch TV and read the newspapers," but they are more influenced by electoral results.</p>
<p>He confirmed that the campaign gave more than $6 million in loans to the campaign in April and May, which he described as a demonstration of the candidate's commitment.</p>
<p>In contrast to the boasting about online fund-raising that followed her Pennsylvania victory, Wolfson said he did not know how much money had come in since last night's results became clear.</p>
<p>He also confirmed a meeting with uncommitted superdelegates on the Hill this afternoon. <span class='read-more'><a href="http://www.observer.com/2008/wolfson-makes-blue-collar-argument-confirms-superdelegate-meeting">&nbsp;read&nbsp;more&nbsp;&raquo;</a></span></p>]]></description>
 <comments>http://www.observer.com/2008/wolfson-makes-blue-collar-argument-confirms-superdelegate-meeting#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/channel/politics">Politics</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/people/barack-obama">Barack Obama</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/people/hillary-clinton">Hillary Clinton</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/24432">Howard Wolfson</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2008 10:34:54 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Jason Horowitz</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">68899 at http://www.observer.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Clinton Campaign: Everything&#039;s Fine, Last Night Was &#039;Progress&#039;</title>
 <link>http://www.observer.com/2008/clinton-campaign-everythings-fine-last-night-was-progress</link>
 <description><![CDATA[<!--paging_filter--><p>The Clinton campaign is not giving an inch, at least not yet.
<p>Howard Wolfson just said at the top of this morning's conference call that the campaign would discuss how it would go forward to the "nomination and victory in November."</p>
<p>Clinton pollster and strategist Geoff Garin said "Indiana was obviously a close outcome but it was an outcome about which we feel very very good."</p>
<p>He said that Clinton came from behind and overcame Obama's spending advantage,  and that it "represents significant progress." <span class='read-more'><a href="http://www.observer.com/2008/clinton-campaign-everythings-fine-last-night-was-progress">&nbsp;read&nbsp;more&nbsp;&raquo;</a></span></p>]]></description>
 <comments>http://www.observer.com/2008/clinton-campaign-everythings-fine-last-night-was-progress#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/channel/politics">Politics</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/52812">Geoff Garin</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/people/hillary-clinton">Hillary Clinton</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/24432">Howard Wolfson</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2008 10:16:31 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Jason Horowitz</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">68898 at http://www.observer.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Clinton Campaign Pushes New Polls</title>
 <link>http://www.observer.com/2008/clinton-campaign-pushes-new-polls</link>
 <description><![CDATA[<!--paging_filter--><p>Not surprisingly, the first words out of Howard Wolfson’s mouth on the Clinton campaign conference call today were about “some recent public polling” that show Hillary Clinton’s strength against John McCain in the general election.
<p> Pollster Geoff Garin then gave a lengthy statement, which began: “The point here is simple. Over the course of the past two weeks, particular since our Pennsylvania victory, there’s been real movement in the polls.” <span class='read-more'><a href="http://www.observer.com/2008/clinton-campaign-pushes-new-polls">&nbsp;read&nbsp;more&nbsp;&raquo;</a></span></p>]]></description>
 <comments>http://www.observer.com/2008/clinton-campaign-pushes-new-polls#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/channel/politics">Politics</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/people/barack-obama">Barack Obama</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/52812">Geoff Garin</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/people/hillary-clinton">Hillary Clinton</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/24432">Howard Wolfson</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/25526">Phil Singer</category>
 <pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2008 12:12:45 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Katharine Jose</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">68627 at http://www.observer.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Yes, Yes, Yes, But</title>
 <link>http://www.observer.com/2008/yes-yes-yes</link>
 <description><![CDATA[<!--paging_filter--><p>On <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/us/politics/17debate.html?hp ">Hillary Clinton's Joycean "yes, yes, yes"</a> answer at last night's debate to the question of whether Barack Obama can win the general election, Howard Wolfson offered the following clarification: "Saying that somebody can win is not the same as saying somebody will win." </p>]]></description>
 <comments>http://www.observer.com/2008/yes-yes-yes#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/channel/politics">Politics</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/people/barack-obama">Barack Obama</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/people/hillary-clinton">Hillary Clinton</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/24432">Howard Wolfson</category>
 <pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 11:46:36 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Jason Horowitz</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">67988 at http://www.observer.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Wolfson Declines an Offer to Grumble About ABC</title>
 <link>http://www.observer.com/2008/wolfson-declines-offer-grumble-about-abc</link>
 <description><![CDATA[<!--paging_filter--><p>The Clinton campaign thinks that the sort of questions Barack Obama faced last night&mdash;tough in a way that angered Obama’s sympathizers, but not at all unexpected&mdash;were appropriate.
<p>On a conference call now, <em>New Yorker</em> legal writer Jeffrey Toobin just gave Howard Wolfson and Phil Singer the chance to perform some media criticism, asking them if questions about Barack Obama's acquaintances and other &quot;trivia&quot; were a valuable part of the political process.  <span class='read-more'><a href="http://www.observer.com/2008/wolfson-declines-offer-grumble-about-abc">&nbsp;read&nbsp;more&nbsp;&raquo;</a></span></p>]]></description>
 <comments>http://www.observer.com/2008/wolfson-declines-offer-grumble-about-abc#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/channel/politics">Politics</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/50811">ABC News</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/people/barack-obama">Barack Obama</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/people/hillary-clinton">Hillary Clinton</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/24432">Howard Wolfson</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/25526">Phil Singer</category>
 <pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 10:49:54 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Jason Horowitz</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">67982 at http://www.observer.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Clinton Says Obama Is as Un-Transparent as They Are</title>
 <link>http://www.observer.com/2008/clinton-campaign-were-all-opaque</link>
 <description><![CDATA[<!--paging_filter--><p>In a &quot;kitchen sink&quot; conference call this morning, the Clinton campaign argued that Barack Obama is not as transparent as he says he is, delivered a statement on John McCain's economic policy, and then tried to adjust expectations for the Pennsylvania primary, which Hillary Clinton was always expected to win comfortably. (“If [Obama] fails to win in Pennsylvania, it will be a significant defeat for him,&quot; said Howard Wolfson).
<p>Then they opened the call. The first questions came from Jeff Toobin, who referenced the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAXucMY7Dvk&amp;eurl=http://thepage.time.com/2008/04/14/new-clinton-pennsylvania-ad-highlights-bitter-comments/">negative ad the Clinton campaign released today</a> and asked, “I wonder if there’s any concern at all in the Clinton campaign whether this is a death spiral that will begin to damage the party?”</p>
<p> “Well first, I appreciate the question,” Wolfson said. “I think I would take some issue with the facts as presented.” <span class='read-more'><a href="http://www.observer.com/2008/clinton-campaign-were-all-opaque">&nbsp;read&nbsp;more&nbsp;&raquo;</a></span></p>]]></description>
 <comments>http://www.observer.com/2008/clinton-campaign-were-all-opaque#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/channel/politics">Politics</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/people/barack-obama">Barack Obama</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/people/hillary-clinton">Hillary Clinton</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/24432">Howard Wolfson</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/50859">Neera Tanden</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/25526">Phil Singer</category>
 <pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2008 11:30:12 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Jason Horowitz</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">67841 at http://www.observer.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>What Has Mark Penn Lost, Exactly?</title>
 <link>http://www.observer.com/2008/what-has-mark-penn-lost-exactly</link>
 <description><![CDATA[<!--paging_filter--><p>The day after the campaign <a href="//www.observer.com/2008/waning-penn">announced Penn's titular demotion</a>, it is not clear yet exactly what influence he has lost.
<p>Marc Ambinder <a href="//marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/04/penn_out_then_in.php">reported</a> that Penn participated this morning on an internal campaign conference call, suggesting the highly plausible possibility that his loss of the right to be called “chief strategist” was more about cauterizing the Colombia mess than empowering Howard Wolfson and Geoff Garin to cut him out of the decision-making loop. <span class='read-more'><a href="http://www.observer.com/2008/what-has-mark-penn-lost-exactly">&nbsp;read&nbsp;more&nbsp;&raquo;</a></span></p>]]></description>
 <comments>http://www.observer.com/2008/what-has-mark-penn-lost-exactly#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/channel/politics">Politics</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/52812">Geoff Garin</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/people/hillary-clinton">Hillary Clinton</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/24432">Howard Wolfson</category>
 <category domain="http://www.observer.com/taxonomy/term/25614">Mark Penn</category>
 <pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2008 16:11:31 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Jason Horowitz</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">67491 at http://www.observer.com</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
