If you paid a higher-than-usual price for a Christmas tree this year, here’s a possible explanation: there’s been a run on them by presidential candidates looking for backdrops for their holiday TV ads.

In previous posts, I linked to Mike Huckabee’s and John Edwards’ ads. Here are two more featuring tannenbaums and candidates (Barack Obama and Rudy Giuliani), plus a Hillary Rodham Clinton ad featuring lots of Christmas wrapping paper, but no tree.

Here’s the Obama ad, titled “Friendship.”

Here’s the Giuliani ad, titled “Same Gift.”

Here’s the Clinton ad, titled “Presents.”

The landscape continues to shift rapidly in Iowa, where recent polls show Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee with gaps over their rivals.

Or, in Obama’s case, maybe not.

Barack Obama

Polling in advance of a caucus is a challenge, because there are a smaller number of caucus-goers than, say, voters in a general election, or even a primary. About 150,000 Democrats and 80,000 Republicans are expected to show up on the night of Thursday, Jan. 3.

Trying to figure out which candidate people support is merely the second task for pollsters. The first task is figuring out who will give up Grey’s Anatomy to do their civic duty.

So it’s not a big surprise that polls are showing a wide spread in results.

In Iowa, for example, Strategic Vision found Obama leading Hillary Rodham Clinton 33 percent to 25 percent, just barely within the poll’s margin of sampling error (The poll was taken 12/08-10; with 600 Likely Voters; with a MoE +/-4.5).

And the Quad City Times had Obama up by 9 points, with 33 percent, to Clinton’s and John Edwards’ 24 percent (12/10-13; 500 LV; MoE 4.5).

But another poll taken at about the same time, by The Hotline, shows the race a tie between Obama and Clinton at 27, with Edwards trailing at 22. (12/07-12; 569 LV; MoE 4)

Finally, Rasmussen has Clinton in the lead 29-26 over Obama, with Edwards again at 22. (12/10; 1106 LV; MoE 3).

On the Republican side, it’s a lot less complicated. It’s Huckabee, Huckabee, Huckabee and Huckabee. His margins range from 5 points (Strategic Vision) to 16 points (Rasmussen) in the last four polls. The big question for Huckabee is whether his newfound popularity will be matched by his supporters actually showing up at caucuses.

Mike Huckabee

Mitt Romney receives 22 to 25 percent support in the polls, Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson are at about 10 percent, and John McCain is at about 6 percent.

In New Hampshire, it’s a different story, with Romney holding leads of 12 to 15 points in the last four polls (FOX News, Concord Monitor, Rassmussen, Suffolk U/WHDH.) McCain comes in second in three of the four.

But the Democratic race is a muddle in New Hampshire, just as it is in Iowa. Clinton leads by 7 points (Suffolk U/WHDH) and 9 points (FOX), but Obama leads by 1 (Concord) and 3 (Rasmussen).

Nationwide, it’s as it’s always been — Clinton and Giuliani leading their respective fields, although Huckabee now has gained a toehold in one poll — Rasmussen’s 4-day tracking poll, where he holds a 2-point margin over Giuliani.

For more on these and other polls, go to Real Clear Politics, an excellent resource for polls.

In her story today, Patricia Lopez describes how the presidential campaign in Iowa spills over the border into southern Minnesota. That includes a blizzard of ads landing in Minnesotan’s living rooms.

Here’s a sample of the ads that the leading candidates are airing in Iowa. Take a look at them and then weigh in with your reactions.

Here’s Obama’s ad on education, titled “Chances I Had.”

Here is John Edwards’s “20 Generations” ad, in which he seeks to establish himself as a spirited fighter against greed and corruption, in behalf of the little guy.

Here are two Clinton ads. This one is called “New Beginning.”

And this one features Retired Gen. Wesley Clark.

On the Republican side, Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee are battling it out — in the polls and on the airwaves.

Here’s Mitt Romney’s ad attacking Huckabee on immigration.

And here’s another Romney ad called “Not Politically Correct,” in which he attempts to reassure conservatives on some key issues.

Here’s Huckabee talking about securing the borders.

And here’s the ad featuring actor Chuck Norris that no doubt helped people warm up to Huckabee.

What do you think about these ads?

This story is developing. Check www.startribune.com for more on this situation and for updates.

ROCHESTER, N.H. (AP) — A man claiming to have a bomb walked into a Hillary Rodham Clinton campaign office Friday and took at least two hostages, police and witnesses said. Clinton was not in the state at the time.

If you can’t be in Iowa, here’s the next best thing — a number of videos that give you a flavor of the campaign as it starts the homestretch run to the Jan. 3 caucuses.

This Obama campaign video shows what activists actually do — in this case, preparing for the Harkin Steak Fry, where Obama was speaking. There’s drums, cheerleaders — and everyone is “fired up, ready to go.”

In debates, John Edwards talks about the fundamentally corrupt system in Washington. That’s the subject of this speech, but it’s delivered with the kind of passion that’s hard to convey during a debate, when you’re standing behind a podium and Wolf Blizter is shouting at you: “Yes or no.”

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign had some egg on its face recently, when it was disclosed that a campaign staffer planted a question — during a Clinton appearance — with an all-too-willing college student. I can’t embed the video here, but here are a couple of links to CNN videos. First, here’s the question and Clinton’s answer. And here’s an interview with the Grinnell College student who explains how it all happened.

This video of former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee isn’t quite as lively and exciting as the Obama video. But just because his supporters aren’t marching and shouting, it doesn’t mean they’re any less enthusiastic and committed to their candidate. It’s people like Bob Anderson who are behind the recent Huckabee surge in Iowa.

Here’s Rudy Giuliani (”the only Republican with an office east of Des Moines”) speaking at the University of Iowa.

Rep. Tom Tancredo last week started running a hard-edged new ad about immigration and terrorism. As he explains at the start, “I’m Tom Tancredo, and I approved this message because someone needs to say it.”

And, for old time’s sake, here’s The Scream — Howard Dean’s overly enthusiastic speech to supporters after his third-place finish in Iowa in 2004.

The consensus analysis of last night’s Democratic debate was that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton regained her balance and appeared forceful, confident and energized.

But an interesting, and less explored, twist was the audience. It sounded awfully partisan for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, and perhaps affected the countours of the debate.

Here’s what Slate’s John Dickerson wrote: “When Obama and Edwards tried to force Clinton into a stumble, they were booed by the occasionally raucous audience. That seemed to make them back off.

“Who knows what motivated the booing. It could have been Hillary partisans. It could have been that the audience didn’t like to hear the attacks. Clinton, for her part, only counter-punched, which may be why when she got pointed the crowd tolerated it. Or it could be that the people in the room, like most Democratic voters, wanted to hear the candidates on the issues.”

Debate organizers typically try to ensure an evenly-balanced audience — giving an equal number of tickets to each campaign, for example. Of course, an evenly-divided crowd doesn’t ensure that all the factions will behave the same way in the hall.

When Sen. Barack Obama spoke sometimes, you could hear some in the audience calling out and interrupting him. It sounded like heckling. And when he stumbled through his answer on driver’s licenses for illegal immigration, and CNN’s Wolf Blitzer called him on it, the crowd laughed heartily.

When Clinton slapped Edwards with the charge that he was engaged in “mud-slinging,” there was no disapproval from the audience.

An energized audience, with its applause and hollering, no doubt enlivens the debate from a viewer’s perspective. But at what price?

Were Obama and Edwards done a disservice by having a live audience that was more on Clinton’s side than on theirs?

In less than two months, voters will begin weeding out the presidential candidates, starting with the Iowa caucuses on Jan. 3 and New Hampshire’s still-to-be-scheduled primary.

So here’s a round-up of the latest news from those two key states, starting with Iowa.

This past weekend was a big one for Democrats, with 9,000 activists attending the party’s annual fundraising event — the Jefferson Jackson Dinner — in Des Moines. At the dinner, John Edwards delivered some of the sharpest rhetoric of the night, according to this AP story.

Here’s the Des Moines Register’s account, along with excerpts of the speeches given by the six candidates who attended the dinner.

Mike Huckabee has made big gains in Iowa

The most recent polls show Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton with a very narrow lead over Sen. Barack Obama and former Sen. John Edwards. The University of Iowa’s Hawkeye Poll surveyed likely caucus-goers Oct. 17-24, and it found that Clinton had 29 percent support, while Obama had 27 percent and Edwards had 20 percent. That put all of them within the poll’s margin of sampling error of plus or minus 5.5 percent. A Zogby poll taken Nov. 6 had Clinton at 28, Obama at 25, and Edwards at 21. In both polls, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson was a long way back, in single digits.

On the Republican side, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney holds a comfortable lead, but former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee is showing signs of surging. The Hawkeye Poll had Romney at 36 percent, and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Huckabee both at about 13 percent, followed by former Sen. Fred Thompson at 11 percent. Zogby found similar results: Romeny at 31, Huckabee at 15, Giuliani at 11 and Thompson at 10.

On Friday, the New York Times had a front-page story that explored this surge by Huckabee. The story said that “there is a new sense of possiblity in the Huckabee campaign. It has been fueled in large part by evangelicals, including a politically active home-schooling population, dissatisfied with his better-financed competitors.”

On the Democratic side, Sen. Joe Biden may be trailing in the polls, but he can boast of having earned the first Iowa newspaper endorsement. Here’s the Storm Lake Times editorial from Oct. 20.

In New Hampshire, Romney again holds a significant lead, according to a Boston Globe poll taken Nov. 2-7. It had Romney at 32, Giuliani at 20, Sen. John McCain at 17, and Huckabee at 5. A Marist Poll taken at about the same time found similar numbers.

Clearly, the Huckabee surge hasn’t spread to New Hampshire, but if he beats expectations in Iowa, that could translate into an immediate boost in New Hampshire.

In the Democratic race, Clinton enjoys a larger lead over Obama than she does in Iowa. The Globe had Clinton at 35 and Obama at 21, with Edwards at 15 and Richardson at 10. The Marist Poll had it Clinton 38, Obama 26, Edwards 14 and Richardson at 6.

Meanwhile, it’s still uncertain when New Hampshire voters will go to the polls. Officials there are waiting to see if Michigan’s attempt to jump up in the schedule to Jan. 15 succeeds. If it does, then New Hampshire almost certainly would go before Michigan, possibly holding its primary in December.

Iran is becoming a central issue in the Democratic presidential race. It was a key point of contention in the Democratic debate earlier this week, and now Barack Obama is making it a key focus — giving a long interview with the New York Times on the issue.

Barack Obama

Obama is stressing the importance of talking to Iran without preconditions, insisting on behavior change — as opposed to regime change — and using both carrots and sticks to encourage that change in behavior.

Hillary Rodham Clinton, meanwhile, was the only Democratic presidential candidate to vote for a resolution declaring the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organization. John Edwards, in Tuesday’s debate, called it a document that read as if it were written by the neocons.

“I mean, has anybody read this thing? I mean, it literally gave Bush and Cheney exactly what they wanted,” he said.

Here are several links for additional reading.

On Thursday Clinton was among 30 senators who sent a letter to President Bush stating that he did not have authority to initiate military action against Iran. The Huffington Post pointed out that Obama did not sign the letter. A couple hours later, Obama went a step further, introducing a resolution to the same effect. Here’s the story on Politically Connected. And here’s the Huffington Post’s report and here’s The Swamp’s report.

Here’s the NYT story about their interview with Obama. And here’s the transcript of the interview.

Last week, Clinton attacked Obama for attacking her over the Iran vote. In an e-mail she sent to Iowans, Clinton said that in 2006 Obama advocated the very position he’s now criticizing. The NYT’s Caucus wrote about this flap and reprinted Clinton’s e-mail.

What do you make of this clash between Clinton and Obama over Iran? Was Clinton right to vote for the resolution declaring the Guards a terrorist group? Do you agree with Obama’s approach to Iran. And how will the fracture over this issue affect the battle for the Democratic nomination?

Last night’s Democratic presidential candidates debate may prove to be a turning point in the nomination contest.

Hillary Rodham Clinton was the target of an unrelenting attack from the right and left — from John Edwards, standing to her right, and from Barack Obama, standing to her left. The reviews on Clinton’s performance are not kind, and they raise new doubts about how firm her grasp is on the front-runner status.

John Edwards makes a point about Hillary Rodham Clinton during Tuesday’s debate

Without a doubt, John Edwards was more aggressive than Barack Obama in the tag-team attack on Clinton, and it seems to have paid off. Readers of the Daily Kos, voting in an online poll, are giving the win to Edwards by a 3 to 2 margin over Obama (3,077 votes to 1,943 votes out of about 9,000 cast). Clinton falls into third place with about 1,500 votes.

Des Moines Register columnist David Yepsen writes: “Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards emerged as the evening’s most effective and articulate challenger to Clinton, who did not acquit herself well and turned in an uneven, sometimes waffling performance.”

Roger Simon at Politico says the debate revealed something not seen before: “When Hillary Clinton has a bad night, she really has a bad night.”

The debate moderators, Tim Russert and Brian Williams, directed their toughest questions at Clinton, asking her to explain inconsistencies in statements she’s given in recent weeks and months.

The Drudge Report says that a Clinton insider blames the mess on NBC’s Tim Russert, saying he was belligerent.

The Informed Voters blog provides a video recap of the highlights of the debate.

Unless anyone wants to argue that Clinton came out ahead last night, here are the questions: How much damage was done to her? Was Russert belligerent, or was he simply trying, in a direct but professional manner, to get Clinton to answer the questions? Finally, was Edwards the big winner from last night?

Al Franken

Even before today’s official deadline for federal candidates to report their fundraising numbers, one thing is abundantly clear: the left is raking in big money.

That’s true nationally and it’s the case in Minnesota, too.

Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Al Franken is enjoying being on the receiving end of this leftist largess.

Meanwhile, Sen. Norm Coleman and U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann, both Republicans, are on the receiving end of the spending by leftist groups. They’re both the targets of new television or radio ads critizing them over Iraq (Coleman) and the children’s health insurance battle (Bachmann).

The advantage the left is enjoying is highlighted at OpenSecrets.org, which tracks political money. The OpenSecrets overview is here. From the presidential race to Senate and House races to issue-oriented groups, the left comes out on top.

Norm Coleman

Consider:

Democratic presidential candidates raised an average of $2.2 million to the Republicans’ $1.2 million.

The top two Democrats – Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama — raised a combined $122 million. The top Republicans — Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani — raised $80 million.

Nine out of 10 of the top overall donors have given more than half their money in 2007 to Democrats.

However you slice it, the Democrats end up with the biggest piece of the pie.

And that money is flowing into Minnesota in a big way. OpenSecrets ranks the Minnesota Senate race as the second most expensive in the nation. The Texas Senate race ranked first with $18.5 million raised by the candidates combined, and Minnesota followed close behind with $16.2 million. A distant third was Massachusetts with $8.2 million.

In the most recent quarter, Franken, the Democratic challenger, achieved the rare feat of outraising the incumbent, Coleman. Here’s the Star Tribune story about Franken and Coleman’s fundraising, and here’s our story about money raised by Mike Ciresi.
The radio ad aimed at Coleman is the work of Keeping America’s Promise, which is Sen. John Kerry’s political action committee. Coleman is one of six Republican senators targeted. You can find out more about Kerry’s effort here. And here is Coleman’s campaign website and here is the page we’ve created about him here on Politically Connected.

Michele Bachmann

While Coleman is being hit by a well-known figure, Bachmann is in the sights of a group that isn’t a household name, but it is one of the biggest left-leaning money groups — the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), with 1.9 million members. The SEIU is part of the coalition paying for the TV ads pressing Bachmann to vote later this week to override President Bush’s veto of the children’s health insurance program.

The SEIU’s advocacy arm (a 527 organization), has raised more money than any other 527 group this election cycle, with $6.7 million, according to OpenSecrets. The closest right wing 527 group: GOPAC with $3.7 million. Here’s SEIU’s website and here’s Bachmann’s campaign website and here’s GOPAC’s site.

OpenSecrets cites the fact that Democrats control Congress as a key reason for their fundraising advantage.

Do you think that explains what’s happening? And why do you think the Minnesota Senate race is drawing so much money?